Sports Illustrated - Power Rankings - East

[LUKE23]

Win predictions should be based off D and O efficiency metrics and nothing more. Last year we were one win off our pythag W-L and most teams are within 3 over a full season. It's the best metric by far in correlating to W-L. So the predictions should start there, when referencing last years team and the 38 wins. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put together a realistic O/D metric prediction that gives a sub 30 pythag W-L. Slightly under last year is reasonable. 8+ wins under last year is not. If you believe that is the case for this team, I'd honestly like to see the numbers behind it.

[Nebula1]

I enjoyed the post, Skones. I agree we will struggle to score and win even if great defensively. Depends on Ersan imo.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xYejfYxT4s[/youtube]

[skones]

I don't care how many defensive guys a team has. In the NBA, you still need to put points up on the board to win basketball games and the Milwaukee Bucks figure to have a TON of problems in that area during the 2013-2014 season.

Remember when everyone freaked out because we lost our top 3 scorers in 2008?

Richard Jefferson, Charlie Villanueva & Ramon Sessions?

Players will still score points. Don't be so scared.

Apparently you don't understand math. The Bucks lost almost 40 ppg with Jennings and Ellis gone. That means they'll score about 60 ppg. Not gonna win a lot of games like that.

That's not the point. Of course players will score points. The point is that this team has one legitimate scoring threat in Mayo and not a particularly good one. OJ FREAKING MAYO! Somehow that's the basis for a more efficient offense. Good luck with that once defenses start keying in on OJ Mayo and Ilyasova who has enough trouble creating his own shot without facing that kind of defensive pressure.

[skones]

Win predictions should be based off D and O efficiency metrics and nothing more. Last year we were one win off our pythag W-L and most teams are within 3 over a full season. It's the best metric by far in correlating to W-L. So the predictions should start there, when referencing last years team and the 38 wins. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put together a realistic O/D metric prediction that gives a sub 30 pythag W-L. Slightly under last year is reasonable. 8+ wins under last year is not. If you believe that is the case for this team, I'd honestly like to see the numbers behind it.

I'd like to see how you "project" for this years team using last years team as a barometer with a grand total of four players returning. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put ANY type of prediction out there with that model for this years team right now. So, no. The predictions shouldn't start there, because in asking for numbers behind my argument, you've got even less supporting yours.

[EastSideBucksFan]

And remember when the 2009-2010 season was a result of catching lightning in a bottle and not anything substantial to base future success upon? Brandon Jennings? John Salmons? Andrew Bogut isn't walking through that door any time soon. But sure, ignore the rest of the post because it doesn't help your argument.

Brandon Knight could be better than Brandon Jennings this year

OJ Mayo could be better than John Salmons during that stretch

Larry Sanders is certainly no slouch and is possibly a better defender than Bogut.


All I'm saying is it's hilarious to see this board hate Jennings & Ellis for the past 18 months and everyone wants to tank. Now, either way this season goes people should be happy. If we are worse, the tankers got exactly what they want. If they are better, then Hammond might have "caught lightning in a bottle" again, but that would prove too many people wrong so that can't be a possibility.

The thing about this season for me personally, I'll be happy with just about whatever outcome we get.

[ampd]

If we are bad (and I think we will be) I just hope we are

1) Bad enough to get a top 5 pick
2) Don't trade assets at the deadline to try to salvage 'win now'

[skones]

And remember when the 2009-2010 season was a result of catching lightning in a bottle and not anything substantial to base future success upon? Brandon Jennings? John Salmons? Andrew Bogut isn't walking through that door any time soon. But sure, ignore the rest of the post because it doesn't help your argument.

Brandon Knight could be better than Brandon Jennings this year

OJ Mayo could be better than John Salmons during that stretch

Larry Sanders is certainly no slouch and is possibly a better defender than Bogut.

Could the world end this year? WELL HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT?! You don't KNOW.

Are you serious? Could they be better? Sure. Will they be better? No.

I don't think you realize just how bad Knight was last season. 30 teams in the league. 30 starting point guards. The average PER of those 30 starting point guards was 17.55. Jennings had a PER of 16.20 last season, ranking him 21st among those 30 players last season, tied with Ricky Rubio. The worst starting point guard in the league was Kirk Hinrich, posting a PER of 10.88. The second worst starting point guard in the league was Brandon Knight, posting a 12.04 PER illustrating MINIMAL growth from his rookie season at 11.79. The THIRD worst starting point guard in the league was Marion Chalmers at 13.29 and then Jameer Nelson at 14.44. That's how bad Knight was last season.

John Salmons posted a PER of 17.3 (basketball reference claims 17.6) during that run with Milwaukee. OJ Mayo's career high in PER is 14.76 and he's coming off a season in which he posted 14.00. Yet another significant gap.

And if you want to say Sanders might be better than Bogut defensively, I'm not going to argue with that too much, because it's possible. FAR more so than the other two scenarios you pointed out. With that being said, Sanders will NOT be as good as Bogut was offensively during that season..

You're trying to draw a comparison that isn't even there.

[EastSideBucksFan]

Could the world end this year? WELL HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT?! You don't KNOW.

Are you serious? Could they be better? Sure. Will they be better? No.

You don't know either dude.

So you can't definitively answer anything about the upcoming season.

Just like I can't.

[skones]

Could the world end this year? WELL HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT?! You don't KNOW.

Are you serious? Could they be better? Sure. Will they be better? No.

You don't know either dude.

So you can't definitively answer anything about the upcoming season.

Just like I can't.

[engelmartin]

We all know how bad Knight was, but we also all know how bad Detroit was. Is that a chicken or the egg kind of argument? If you put up impressive stats on a bad team, they're easily written off as "meaningless", so his bad stats should be equally meaningless. Why don't we give him a clean slate for the year? Plus, the more he sucks, the easier it is to move him to the bench for Ridnour/1st round pick. It's all win win.

[skones]

We all know how bad Knight was, but we also all know how bad Detroit was. Is that a chicken or the egg kind of argument? If you put up impressive stats on a bad team, they're easily written off as "meaningless", so his bad stats should be equally meaningless. Why don't we give him a clean slate for the year? Plus, the more he sucks, the easier it is to move him to the bench for Ridnour/1st round pick. It's all win win.

Bad stats are not equally meaningless. They mean you aren't a very good player. Impressive stats are written off to an extent because they are a product of inflation on that team. I don't know if teams write them off as being meaningless more than they look at that player like they could provide quality production off the bench rather than legitimate starter quality. When you start thinking of Knights numbers possibly being inflated in the same sense, you're reaching a point where those numbers are not meaningless, they are scary.

I don't care that he's bad, because he's cheap. The point I'm making is that many here are seemingly quantifying the transition from Jennings and Monta to Knight and Mayo as a lateral move as far as production is concerned while removing the headaches that came along with the $wag twins. That's simply not the case.

[engelmartin]

I don't care that he's bad, because he's cheap. The point I'm making is that many here are seemingly quantifying the transition from Jennings and Monta to Knight and Mayo as a lateral move as far as production is concerned while removing the headaches that came along with the $wag twins. That's simply not the case.

Yeah I kind of jumped in here, missed the first part of the conversation. So are you saying Mayo and Knight should be better, or worse? I for one like Mayo a lot more than Ellis, although that can be chocked up to the simple fact that he can shoot. We're going to suck though, guaranteed. Personally, I don't care either way, just wanted BJ/Ellis out of town regardless.

Jennings had the same problem Bogut faced much of his time here: he often didn't have a competent backup. Ridnour should remove a lot of that pressure from Knight, just as he did the first time he was here with Jennings. Although, if Knight really sucks Ridnour should move into the starting lineup pretty quickly.

[LUKE23]

I'd like to see how you "project" for this years team using last years team as a barometer with a grand total of four players returning. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put ANY type of prediction out there with that model for this years team right now. So, no. The predictions shouldn't start there, because in asking for numbers behind my argument, you've got even less supporting yours.

Not true at all. It's pretty much common sense. If the defense improves over last year, and there is literally zero argument to be made that it won't, then the O, which was already 22nd in the NBA last year, will need to fall off a cliff to decrease the win total to what some people are saying. The O was **** last season. I don't disagree it can and will likely be worse this year, but it's not going to drop enough to push the Bucks to sub 30 wins with an improvement in D. Just wait and see.

[skones]

I'd like to see how you "project" for this years team using last years team as a barometer with a grand total of four players returning. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put ANY type of prediction out there with that model for this years team right now. So, no. The predictions shouldn't start there, because in asking for numbers behind my argument, you've got even less supporting yours.

Not true at all. It's pretty much common sense. If the defense improves over last year, and there is literally zero argument to be made that it won't, then the O, which was already 22nd in the NBA last year, will need to fall off a cliff to decrease the win total to what some people are saying. The O was **** last season. I don't disagree it can and will likely be worse this year, but it's not going to drop enough to push the Bucks to sub 30 wins with an improvement in D. Just wait and see.

It's also "pretty much common sense" that our offense WILL take a considerable dip in efficiency. Without Jennings and Ellis to take the pressure off of guys, Ilyasova, Mayo, and Knight will take the brunt of the responsibility for shot creation. Ilyasova as a number two option, in all likelihood, will see a considerable dip in his efficiency. I'd also like to point out that for all of Jennings and Ellis's faults, the two were far from terrible at creating open looks for other players on the team. When you replace their playmaking skills with that of Knight (well below average) and Mayo (average) you'll see even less of that. I'd venture to say that Jennings ability to find looks for others was average to slightly above average at the position last season and Ellis was well above average from the shooting guard position.

I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we "improve" as far as defense is concerned. With the number of new faces, on the team, I think you'll see a transitional period on that end of the floor where everyone is still trying to figure out where everyone else should be well into the season.

[LUKE23]

Jennings was garbage at creating. Monta when he had the right mindset was good at it. Either way, the offense will be worse in all likelihood, but three point shooting will mitigate the overall drop to marginal is my guess. I see the Bucks around 26th in offense.

Regarding the D, the only way it doesn't improve is if Drew is in on the tank. He has a strong defensive track record and this roster is better defensively than last years. There also won't be a coaching change after 32 games to a coach with zero defensive accountability. It will be surprising if the Bucks aren't top ten in d.

Like I said, if you are expecting anything under ~34 wins you will be disappointed. I hope I'm wrong, I want a high pick.

[LedZepp007]

I'd like to see how you "project" for this years team using last years team as a barometer with a grand total of four players returning. You're going to be very, very hard pressed to put ANY type of prediction out there with that model for this years team right now. So, no. The predictions shouldn't start there, because in asking for numbers behind my argument, you've got even less supporting yours.

Not true at all. It's pretty much common sense. If the defense improves over last year, and there is literally zero argument to be made that it won't, then the O, which was already 22nd in the NBA last year, will need to fall off a cliff to decrease the win total to what some people are saying. The O was **** last season. I don't disagree it can and will likely be worse this year, but it's not going to drop enough to push the Bucks to sub 30 wins with an improvement in D. Just wait and see.

It's also "pretty much common sense" that our offense WILL take a considerable dip in efficiency. Without Jennings and Ellis to take the pressure off of guys, Ilyasova, Mayo, and Knight will take the brunt of the responsibility for shot creation. Ilyasova as a number two option, in all likelihood, will see a considerable dip in his efficiency. I'd also like to point out that for all of Jennings and Ellis's faults, the two were far from terrible at creating open looks for other players on the team. When you replace their playmaking skills with that of Knight (well below average) and Mayo (average) you'll see even less of that. I'd venture to say that Jennings ability to find looks for others was average to slightly above average at the position last season and Ellis was well above average from the shooting guard position.

I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we "improve" as far as defense is concerned. With the number of new faces, on the team, I think you'll see a transitional period on that end of the floor where everyone is still trying to figure out where everyone else should be well into the season.

I think you are dead on correct. We need a true alpha dog (hopefully an efficient one) to make this team work. If we can somehow win 22-30 games this year and get an Exum, Parker, or Wiggins, this team may be quite good in 2-3 years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[EastSideBucksFan]

It's also "pretty much common sense" that our offense WILL take a considerable dip in efficiency. Without Jennings and Ellis to take the pressure off of guys, Ilyasova, Mayo, and Knight will take the brunt of the responsibility for shot creation. Ilyasova as a number two option, in all likelihood, will see a considerable dip in his efficiency. I'd also like to point out that for all of Jennings and Ellis's faults, the two were far from terrible at creating open looks for other players on the team. When you replace their playmaking skills with that of Knight (well below average) and Mayo (average) you'll see even less of that. I'd venture to say that Jennings ability to find looks for others was average to slightly above average at the position last season and Ellis was well above average from the shooting guard position.

I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we "improve" as far as defense is concerned. With the number of new faces, on the team, I think you'll see a transitional period on that end of the floor where everyone is still trying to figure out where everyone else should be well into the season.

Your logic is severely flawed sir.

Removing Jennings & Ellis and you think our efficiency goes down?

That's hilarious.

Jennings is in the same category as Mo Williams when it comes to "playmaking"

Ersan doesn't have plays run for him very much. He's a pick & pop guy and garbage man on the boards.

I don't see any reason my his efficiency will dip.

[skones]

Jennings was garbage at creating. Monta when he had the right mindset was good at it. Either way, the offense will be worse in all likelihood, but three point shooting will mitigate the overall drop to marginal is my guess. I see the Bucks around 26th in offense.

We didn't improve our three point shooting much if at all this offseason. What we've become SIGNIFICANTLY worse at, and it was something we were pretty bad at last season anyway, was our ability to get into the lane. There is not a single player on this team that can get into the paint and finish. We might have the worst offense in the entire league when it's all said and done.

I think you are dead on correct. We need a true alpha dog (hopefully an efficient one) to make this team work. If we can somehow win 22-30 games this year and get an Exum, Parker, or Wiggins, this team may be quite good in 2-3 years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I completely agree, with the exception of Parker of course. I'm not too high on him.

[skones]

It's also "pretty much common sense" that our offense WILL take a considerable dip in efficiency. Without Jennings and Ellis to take the pressure off of guys, Ilyasova, Mayo, and Knight will take the brunt of the responsibility for shot creation. Ilyasova as a number two option, in all likelihood, will see a considerable dip in his efficiency. I'd also like to point out that for all of Jennings and Ellis's faults, the two were far from terrible at creating open looks for other players on the team. When you replace their playmaking skills with that of Knight (well below average) and Mayo (average) you'll see even less of that. I'd venture to say that Jennings ability to find looks for others was average to slightly above average at the position last season and Ellis was well above average from the shooting guard position.

I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we "improve" as far as defense is concerned. With the number of new faces, on the team, I think you'll see a transitional period on that end of the floor where everyone is still trying to figure out where everyone else should be well into the season.

Your logic is severely flawed sir.

Removing Jennings & Ellis and you think our efficiency goes down?

That's hilarious.

Jennings is in the same category as Mo Williams when it comes to "playmaking"

Ersan doesn't have plays run for him very much. He's a pick & pop guy and garbage man on the boards.

I don't see any reason my his efficiency will dip.

Where exactly is your logic? If Jennings is in the same category as Mo Williams, what category is Brandon Knight in? He's far worse than Jennings in that area. So even if you think Jennings is terrible, that doesn't speak to the point of regression this offense will endure in that facet of the game. As already stated, Mayo isn't nearly as good in that area as Ellis is either.

So where does the offensive focus go? It goes on Mayo, and Ilyasova. Where do Ilyasova's open looks come from when he's unable to get his own look? Do you expect Knight and Mayo, players who are allergic to the paint, to run an efficient pick and pop game? With no real scoring options on offense, teams will look for the opportunities Ilyasova has made a living off of the past few years and make that a focus. There are massive gaping holes in any type of offensive game plane Drew tries to assemble because of the personnel involved. Significantly more so than last year IMO.

He really needs to be dealt before he's exposed this season.

[LUKE23]

We didn't improve our three point shooting much? Lol.

Knight is better than BJ, Mayo is galaxies better than Ellis. Delfino is only a slight downgrade from Dunleavy and Ridnour, Neal, Middleton can all shoot off the bench. Hell, the starting five alone assuming Delfino starts has four good three point options. Our **** SG/SF last year were Ellis and Moute. Let that sink in for a second.