With Bogut on the sidelines, a recent drop out of a playoff spot, and on the verge of falling away of spitting distance of the .500 mark, the Bucks' match-up with the Dallas Mavericks was important. They won. And frankly, it wasn't very close. The new-this-season defense has been faltering a bit over the last couple games, but I guess defense doesn't matter as much when Redd and Charlie V are hot at the same time. Charlie V led the way with 32 points and Redd added 27, including five 3-pointers in the Bucks 133-99 route of the Mavericks. And it certainly wasn't a 2-man show. Ramon Sessions also added 23 off of the bench, Richard Jefferson was probably only a few minutes of playing time away from a triple-double (15/7/8), as a team they out-rebounded Dallas 46 to 33 without Bogut and were 13 for 26 from the 3-point line. It was like they couldn't miss, well, except Francisco Elson's third-quarter buzzer shot from half court. It may have been the most complete game I've seen the Bucks play in my life, and it looked good.
The only bad part was the 10-year-old kid sitting behind me yelling "you suck" about 25 times per quarter. Man was he annoying. That was almost a swear word when I was his age. I'm not sure who he was talking too.
The Bucks are now 21-24 and back to 8th in the conference. They head to Atlanta (25-16) on Friday, followed by Sacramento (10-33) and Minnesota (13-27) at home on Saturday and Monday.
1 day ago
12 comments:
The most frustrating thing about this years Bucks team is the inconsistency.
They will beat teams like the Spurs and Mavs and then lose to the Clippers and Portland.
For awhile they had such a win one lose one pattern I was considering betting some money on them using that pattern.
It would be nice to see them win 3 or 4 in a row and get a couple games over .500
FYI, Portlan is good.
What the Bucks have going for them is that they're in the 8th spot despite having played a very tough schedule mostly on the road. They will probably start to make some headway starting about now.
I will take your word on Portland I still do not follow the NBA that closely
They've drated extremely well over the last 3 years, and before the season started, were talked about as a potential title contender. (That was based on Oden being better than he is). I believe they currently sit 5th in the West, still very good.
Saying "You Suck!" would have been certain death for me as a young child.
Rob,
I know, right? Especially in a crowd a few hundred times. With his parents right there. In his defense, I'm sure he has bad parents.
I personally believe Children below the age of 15 should not be allowed on the lower level. If you can afford those seats you can afford a babysitter
additionally, portland is the most entertaining team in the nba... when oden isn't playing... he's like a human hairball clogging up a drain of basketball greatness. lamarcus aldridge is 3 times the player that dude is.
i have no optimism for the bucks. they are an effort-based team. (scott skiles teams usually are) as their energy fades and other teams start trying hard again come february, they will hit a long slide.
they remind me of the phil garner brewer teams that could hang around .500 until june before going 25-56 in the second half.
Absolutely correct on Oden and Aldridge.
There are reasons to be more optimistic about the Bucks. There schedule is much easier down the stretch. Bogut, still probably their most important player, is going to get extended rest and so far they have coped well. If they do not trade Villanueva he will remain motivated all year. Skiles did manage to get fairly untalented Bulls teams into the playoffs, at least for a few years.
It also appears that Ramon Sessions is actually pretty good and should see the floor more. There's some room for internal imrpovement.
And it's not like they're a talentless wasteland. Richard Jefferson is legitamately good. Redd is a nice complement. Bogut's a halfway decent big. This is not the Frank Brickowski/Blue Edwards Bucks team.
yeah, i like sessions myself. having not seen him play, i expected him to be a shrimp-- a quick little jitterbug guy that racks up pts and assists by virtue of ball-hogging and being quick. i was really surprised that he's more of a physical slasher type. i can't really fathom why luke ridnour plays actually.
i guess a problem is that sessions is sorta unique as a player, so coaches are scared of playing him or something. i see very few bucks games, so perhaps his warts were just not on display when i saw him.
i respectfully disagree about jefferson. he's just not the kinda player you can win with as a centerpiece. he's just a guy to me-- could start and be a 4th or 5th guy on a good team, but if he's in your top 3, you're in trouble. i absolutely hated that trade.
i kinda tend to group nba players into tiers. first tier is great players-- stars that can lead teams. the bucks have zero of these guys. the second tier is good players who can be stars in the right situation. i put bogut and redd in this group-- if these guys are your complimentary players, you'll have a good team. third tier is useful guys-- guys who could possibly start on good teams but might be a focus on bad teams. i put jefferson, charlie v., and sessions here.
i just don't know that they have enough to really be relevant anytime soon without magically picking up some tier 1 guy somehow...
joe alexander is not that guy.
Well, that's true. I tend to do the same, and they clearly lack a 1st tier player, and in terms of actually winning a championship they're clearly not relevant, but if you put enough complimentary guys together, you're in good shape should a great player fall into your lap. I think that's where they currently are. You can also go "the Pistons" route if you can get enough 2nd tier guys.
I think Jefferson's as good as Redd, and would knock him up a notch too.
"i kinda tend to group nba players into tiers. first tier is great players-- stars that can lead teams. the bucks have zero of these guys. the second tier is good players who can be stars in the right situation. i put bogut and redd in this group-- if these guys are your complimentary players, you'll have a good team. third tier is useful guys-- guys who could possibly start on good teams but might be a focus on bad teams. i put jefferson, charlie v., and sessions here."
I basically agree, but I would move Charlie V. into that second tier. I got to every game and from what I see, Charlie V. is the best player on the team when he's trying. With Skyles coaching and being in a contract year, that's most of the time this season.
"I think Jefferson's as good as Redd, and would knock him up a notch too."
No way. People kept telling me that when we traded for hum, but from what I've seen, Jefferson is very mediocre. Of course, I might put both he and Redd back a level.
I'll add that my opinions are based totally on my flawed memory. I haven't looked at a single stat and I don't know anything about basketball.
Post a Comment