HiAndTight

I question the sanity of anyone that gets fired up when they hear Renegade. There are literally thousands of other better crappy 70's, 80's, hair metal, whatever songs you could choose from. I don't mind the song in particular, but a former coach and teacher of mine who I worked with during summers in HS and College(he owned a side business) loved exactly that type of music. The big hair music, particularly the 80's. The worst decade for music in my opinion. Of course he thinks I'm nuts, but a lot of it is hard to listen to.

Ok, most on this site agree with you, so what exactly does Burnes need to work on in AAA? To me, he looks better right now than he did last year out of the pen, a tick more on the FB if nothing else. Well, he's not supposed to be a reliever for one. So qualifying it with he looks better out of the pen just skips over the fact that he failed badly as a starting pitcher. But I think everyone's pointed it out. His fastball location has been bad this year. That's why he's got an ERA just shy of 10 now and that's why he's giving up HR's at a ridiculous rate. I don't know how you can say he looks better this year in any way than he did last year.

Not sure i would go that high on him. Maybe a tick above average but is really terrible at getting off blocks. Good speed but once someone gets his hands on him it's game over. That's pretty standard for the NFL today. You can't be both a big, physical LB'er who can blow up guards and a guy who can cover ground. He may be one of the best 4-5 in the NFL at slipping blocks though and if not, he's definitely among the best at shooting the gap and making plays. But the days of NFL LB'ers taking on linemen and then shedding them is over. Urlacher was terrible when it came to that and he's one of the top 3-4 MLB'ers in the last 25-30 years. There are only so many Luke Kuechly's out there.

Yeah, I don't think you do. When I think of the Badgers and Kentucky, I think about that ridiculously loaded undefeated team that we beat. The team that had a chance to be one of the best teams in NCAA history and we knocked them out. The best NBA team can certainly lose to a bad team on any given night. But you're arguing apples and oranges. The 68th best CBB team is still in the top 20 pct of College programs. Compare that to the NBA and you have one of the top ~6 teams. So you're basically talking about a Utah type team(or better) beating a Golden State type team on a given night. Still believe that never happens? Even the worst teams win in the NBA against the top teams on a somewhat regular basis. The Bucks lost to the Suns twice this year while beating GSW and Portland. So I don't get how you could say "No way," that happens in the NBA. Yeah, never happens in the NBA... Finally, I'll say this. At least in the NBA, a moribund franchise can become one of the best in the league. Golden State was a joke for years. The Bucks, a joke for years. 2 of the final teams this year. Not sure I can picture a scenario where Iona goes on a 4 year run of final fours and wins a couple of championships.

Maybe that's the perception of college basketball, but there have been 11 different winners in the past 20 years. There are also 350 or so college BB programs compared to 30 NBA. And you look at the list over the 20 years, it's almost exclusively the programs you'd expect. The Uconn, Kentucky, Duke, the bluebloods. And if you look at the recruiting rankings, it gets even more pronounced. CFB is even worse as the recruitings tilts the same, but one player doesn't make as big of a difference. So if a top 10, 5 star recruit flames out for a College BB program, that's tough to overcome whereas it happens regularly at a program like Alabama or OSU.

Settle down, I was trying to be nice. You're post in response to CHL was poorly written. And Rondo is a terrible fit with this team. If you don't understand why, then by all means continue to put your lack of understanding of the Bucks offense and what they need around Giannis on full display for all. Seems to me you're the one who's struggled to understand the problem we ran into in the post-season. We won't hit shots, we have very little ball movement. But again I ask you, find me a veteran PG who could be available for ~5.7 million dollars that you like better? That's all you have to do. Prove me wrong, make a list and then you can show me how little I understand. Or maybe it'd be alright to NOT have Giannis dribble into a crowd(or Bled) and have someone who can actually distribute the ball when the game slows down and you have to play a half-court style game more often in the post-season and the guy who nearly averaged a Triple Double just last year might be a decent backup PG.

We're already talking about trading him with multiple years of control left? He got a late start. Maybe he has success into his mid 30's. I wouldn't mind adding a couple years with team options similar to those mentioned above. I don't get the desire to look to trading guys so far out though. I've seen it mentioned with Yelich. Lets wait and see where we are before we start thinking about trading guys.

Marcum or Guerra? Edit-Scratch that, I think I remember who it was. I believe it was a pitcher who originally started his career with another NL Central team?

As he says, "No hold MY beer" to Thon Maker. Savage and Amos are a monumental upgrade. If Jones doesn't move to LILB he won't play. He probably needs to move to LILB because he's not good enough in coverage for the current NFL game at SS. The defense actually looks good now, even if I'm not enthralled with Gary. It'd be bordering on elite if it wasn't for fact that our interior LBs are terrible. I don't think Jones was ever expected to play or start in the base at MLB'er. We need more depth at LB'er and Owen Burks is totally unproven, but he flashed a bit last year. Blake Martinez is a very solid, well above average inside backer.

I'd agree with these except for the Packers. The Packers have really choked away a lot of chances and they've done so often times by simply making awful-awful mistakes. Not playing better or more talented teams, but by just throwing it away. Favre vs the Eagles. They're dominating on the ground, it's 1st down in OT and he throws the ball up for grabs and there's some sort of mis-communication because Walker isn't within 12-15 yards when it falls into Dawkins hands and the game is over. Favre vs the Rams the year before that, he throws 6 picks and fumbles(we turn the ball over 8 times total) and the defense was actually playing the Rams well. Of the 45 points the Rams scored, Favre put them directly in position to score 35 of them(3 actual pick 6's). The Seattle game. Too many ways to go on that one. Sure, you have to be good to get there, but that's the whole point. We all know we're not going to have this type of talent forever at QB for the Packers, so when they lose a game and they lose it because THEY screwed up, it makes it that much worse. The NFCCG they got blown out by Atlanta, they had no secondary, so hard to get upset about that. But there have been 4 or 5 other times at least they COULD have won and gone to or won a Super Bowl but they lost it. Even in the actual Super Bowl they lost. People forget, but with about 1:40 left in that game, before the 4th down was incomplete to Chumura, Favre threw a perfect strike down to about the 20 to Freeman and he just dropped the ball.

Why wouldn't you count the team that won the Super Bowl? Because the Atlanta Falcons were the no. 1 seed with a 13-3 record and then got punched in the mouth by a hot 10-6 wild card team. Other teams come up short too. It’s not just a Packer thing. Well, first of all, if you're making a list of the teams that were arguably the best teams in the NFL that year, the team that wins the Super Bowl makes it for LITERALLY no other reason than they WON the Super Bowl. But beyond that. You mentioned Atlanta. They blew the doors off Atlanta the second time they played them on the road. The first time they lost by 3 points after tying the game up late. Also, based on SOS, of which the Packers had one of the toughest and point differential the Packers should have been a 12+ win team and the Packers were the 2nd best team in the regular season according to Pro-Football Focus. Not to mention that's in a season in which they were constantly beset by injuries to key players, leading to I think 15 or 16 guys going on IR. Really hard to see how that team doesn't have an argument for being the best team in football. You also left out the 13-3 2007 season in which they were a very read by Favre away from going to the Super Bowl(Favre had 3 guys wide open on that INT, including one that could have gone for about 40 after the catch and run if not more if he hadn't zeroed in on Driver). That year they were considered the 4th best team on SOS and margin of victory. Then there is the 2003 season, again, a season in which they were considered the 2nd best regular season team based on Schedule and Margin of victory. Another game threw away by Favre in a season in which Ahman Green ran for what at the time was one of the 4 or 5 best single-season rushing totals in NFL history and included the 4th and 26 game that allowed Philly to tie the game up and the 1st down INT that looked more like a punt to Brian Dawkins after the Packers had run for probably close to 250 yards on the ground that day(they also had the best OL in the NFL during that period). And then without belaboring the point more, in both 2001 and 2002 the Packers could have arguably been considered the best team in the NFL. It took 7 Favre turnovers, 3 I believe going for TD's, 1 returned inside the 5 and then two more taking them out of scoring position to get beat by the Rams and the 2002 team again came back with a dominant rushing attack and a future HOF QB. Finally, the 1998 team has to be in the discussion. If there was replay, the Packers don't have to suffer the Young to TO TD as Rice clearly-clearly fumbled on that late drive, but they were considred the 4th best regulars season team that year. So without going year by year, that's another 5 or 6 years where you could easily argue they were the best team in the NFL or that they should have won the SB(again, especially including the year they actually DID win the Super Bowl).

Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but the Bucks offense needs to evolve a bit next year as well. It can't stay the same all the time no matter who's out there. I'm talking about a backup PG who can get the ball moving and who can find guys and get them the ball in position to shoot it. One of the big problems was so often you saw Bled or Giannis stumbling and fumbling the ball before kicking it out. Rondo's a longer PG and a great ball handler. You start the game with Giannis and 4 guys who can shoot ideally, fine, but then in that second unit, you need someone else to handle the PG duties. Plus, coach Bud is smart with Giannis, meaning he rests him quite a bit. So the next PG doesn't have to be a 43 pct 3 point shooter. Just able to keep the offense on track while guys are resting. I like the upside that DDV brings, but we've seen so little out of him. I'm just looking around at potential PG's we could bring in...and I know you firmly believe George Hill will be back, I think his contract will be prohibitive, so this hypothetical assumes that Hill is gone. I didn't watch Rondo play much this year...and honestly not much last year except for the post-season where he looked outstanding. His quickness looked fine then, but at his age, you can fall off pretty quickly. But mainly, it's not easy finding a veteran, proven PG who is still young enough to be able to give you those 15-20 minutes, maybe 25 minutes and talented enough yet to actually help open up the offense. I hope one thing changes about the Bucks offense next season. I hope that try to incorporate some more movement and picks. Right now the offense is basically, one guy in each corner, two guys on both sides at the top of the 3 point line and then Giannis driving and if they double, him kicking it out. So you need to find a guy who's A-Got playoff experience. B-In this hypothetical scenario would be able to be signed for 5-6 million. C-Can get guys an open shot. D/E-Obviously good defense is a plus, but passable defense would be alright, but also they need to be able to penetrate as well. I've been a fan of Elfrid Payton since he came out, but he can't shoot and he's not exactly a proven vet who's been tested. Also likely to cost more. I floated Ricky Rubio and Patrick Beverly, but I think both are going to be able to command much more than we'd be willing to pay. Beverly looks like a 10-12 million dollar a year player to me. Probably a better starting PG than Bledsoe to be honest. His defense is at least as good and he's still in his prime athletically. In fact, I'd probably trade a guy like Brogdon for Beveryly and as Hill seems to be your favorite not superstar on the team, Brogdon's been mine. So not really realistic guys for what may be the tax payers MLE. After that, you're left with a grouping of guys like Derek Rose and TJ McConnell. Though honestly, I'd be really happy to bring in McConnell. I kinda like him and think he could play some minutes for us. I think he could even start for a 20-25 game stretch and the Bucks wouldn't lose that much. Perhaps it'll come from someone getting traded and then bought out at the end of the year, or the Bucks will find another gem as they did with Lopez. Better yet, the owners are willing to pay 200 million in payroll and we get to run it back with everyone together again. I do know this though, just because the Bucks offense is designed to get shooters around Giannis doesn't mean you can't afford to have a 34 pct 3 point shooter who's also a great passer playing the point for stretches during the game As for the draft, I'm jumping on board the Jontay Porter bandwagon. I think he's got a very high upside as a stretch 4 and his passing ability could end up being elite for a big man. Injuries are a concern, but 30th pick in the NBA draft is going to be a long shot to become much anyway. I am definitely interested to see what DDV can do next year though. He seems like a more talented version of Pat C. I don't think he quite had the 44 inch vertical, but I thought it was not too far off.

If you're struggling so far to find where someone advocated signing Rondo, why did you even mention him? Also, if you think we're going to do that much better than Rondo, I'm not sure you understand the realities of the Bucks current payroll situation and salary restrictions. And I threw him out there because he's an outstanding passer and, while never being a great on-ball defender, he's been very good at playing the passing lanes and playing team defense. More importantly, because he has an enormous BB IQ and has performed at his best in the biggest moments and we're talking about looking for a potential BACKUP PG under an assumed scenario that the Bucks don't bring back George Hill. You don't seem to understand that the Bucks struggled badly in the half court and just last year Rondo averaged 10 pts, 12 assists and 8 rebounds in the playoffs. But by all means, please dazzle me with a suggestion as to who we could bring in to play a backup role at the point who has playoff experience and who could be available for ~5.7 million a year since I "obviously" don't understand the very basic offense that Bud runs with Giannis?

The Bucks scored 100 points in regulation just once in the final four games. The game they lost by 22. It was 100 pct the Bucks offense and absolutely NOT their defense. Yup. Its hard to win when you can't hit the broad side of a barn, especially in the post season. For sure, and the more each point matters, the more you see the ball coming up short because guys are getting tight. You can see the difference in the follow through or lack thereof. But again, lets all remember, the Raptors were a team known for choking, VanVleet and Lowry were the two biggest culprits and once they started playing well, they got their confidence back. "Trust the process," to steal the Sixers slogan, but our process now is just watching this team overcome obstacles. Giannis and his shooting, Bledsoe and his tightening up in the post-season. Mirotic and whatever the hell that was from him this past series(he's a really good player, making his total and complete collapse that much more confounding). They'll learn and they'll grow. I just hope Giannis takes a vacation and lets his body rest. I could really see him in the gym right now starting his off-season program. Speaking of which, that reminds me of a story. Dan Gable, one of the top maybe 6 or 7 greatest wrestlers of all time(And the greatest coach) just got done winning the World Championship's just after his Sr year in college by absolutely dominating his opponents, won 17-6 in the Championship and that was the closest match he had all the way through. He gets back to the hotel with a few other former Olympic Champs and World Champs and they're all talking about what they're gonna do, eat, whatever Gable says nothing. His roommate, from whom I heard this story see him putting on sweats and his running shoes. "What the hell are you doing," he asks. Gable says, "I'm gonna run "the circle." Not sure what that was, but it came out to 8.5 miles. It's 10 PM on a Saturday, just an hour after the "regular crowd shuffles in" and these guys are all laughing at him. There are a few people every generation who have that type of drive and commitment. Sometimes it can make you successful and overcome talent. When you're already talented, it can make you great. That's the type of guy Giannis has shown he is. The only concern I have for Giannis this off-season is there's someone in his camp to make sure he doesn't over-train. I'm sure he'll get his 1,000 shots a day up, but the physical toll the running takes and all that, he needs to take it easy.

Agreed on the Raptors. That's why I was REALLY hoping that the Sixers would have won that series. They're good and they're long and they're athletic, but the "Giannis Wall," can be beaten. What really is tough for him to beat without a great-great defender like Kawhi is the Giannis Wall and then someone playing him as tough on the ball. I thought Boston and Toronto were the two biggest threats. I didn't think Indy was one(with or without Oladipo) and I thought we'd be able to beat the Sixers because I just don't have faith in Embid like others do. As for Hill, god please no. I'm not sure if that should have been in blue or not since this topic has been debated to death already. If the owners are willing to go crazy and go way into the luxury tax, I'd be happy if he'd be back next year. I think we all would. The off-season isn't far away though, so we'll see what happens with that shortly. You never DID end up giving an opinion on Rondo though. IF he were willing to sign on for the taxpayers MLE,how'd you feel about him being your veteran PG next year? This would assume they lose Lopez of course(unless he's willing to re-sign for ~4.3 million which is unlikely, but possible since he'd made quite a bit in his career but for bad teams). In the draft, give me the Center from Arkansas, Maryland or a good PG if one is available.

I'd just heard a "rep" for the Starr family talking about how he planned on attending the Packers Week 2(?) game in which they were going to honor someone or some team. I don't know, if it was my Dad, I'd be thankful for every moment I got with him. But if it was me, to suffer those strokes, do all the painstaking work to come back and get healthy and then pass away. That's just that much tougher. It seemed like he was getting better. That man is up there with Lombardi in Green Bay History. Not just for his play on the field, but because of the type of presence he had off of it and the things he did with regard to charity off of it.

Why wouldn't you count the team that won the Super Bowl? The team that they played in the NFCCG was a team that lost THREE times all year long. All to the Packers. And the reason Packers fans act like they've left a dynasty on the table is because...they've left a dynasty on the table. There's no question about that. They had an unstoppable offense, a couple DPOY candidates, and they blow their chance at winning back to back titles in 2011. And with 30+ years of having HOF QB's, two titles is absolutely unacceptable. Count how many times in there has NE had the best team in football? It's not any more than that. They've just managed to be ONE of the best and then found ways to win. The Packers last 3 decades have been great, but like Wolf said about that 90's team, it should have been a dynasty, but ended up like a fart in the wind. Also, we've suffered our fair share major injuries. If Finley stays healthy, we've got a weapon like KC has right now in Kelce, like the Eagles have in Ertz. People forget how good he WAS, not how good he was going to be. I THINK he still has the record for most yards in a playoff game(unless Nelson beat it in the Superbowl in 2010). Then you factor in Nick Collins injury, a guy who a possible HOF talent. He was just a half step away from playing at that level and then he'd have had to do it for several years, but in any event, a great player and he goes low against a big back in Stewart and what looks like the slightest brush of his leg against Collins neck ends up ending his professional career. You also have Terrance Murphy, a WR'er who was more talented physically than any of the studs the Packers have had and similar to Jordy in size/speed, just faster and as he's on the precipice of making that next jump, he suffers a career ender. And of course, you have the Sam Shields injury. The Packers didn't just lost talented players, they lost talented players at positions they couldn't afford to lose them. At positions that became black holes after they left, save for Murphy. But bottom line, when you have Aaron Rodgers, the most physically gifted QB to ever play the game IMO...a player who's almost as smart as he is talented and you win but ONE SB and you blow several other shots, that's' devastating. Especially since there's a very good chance to expect that the Packers, post-Aaron Rodgers could end up being a team that struggles for years.

Ok, but they're hardly the only ones who believe that Jason Kidd is a capable coach. I actually liked his defensive philosophy in theory when he came here. Especially when I thought Maker was gonna be a much-much better player(I never thought he'd be a future MVP as others actually wrote, but still). We were a VERY long team and I liked the 1990's, Nolan Richardson, 40(or 48) minutes of hell type defensive strategy with..I'm going back now, but MCW at the point, 6'7, Midds at the 2, 6'8, Giannis, 6'11, Thon and Larry Sanders. So that didn't work obviously, but if it had and if he could have just incorporated it better, ie, going to it less....whatever, I'm not going to defend what Kidd did here. Just the owners reasons for believing Kidd could be a good coach. He did do a good job in Brooklyn the year before, taking a roster that was built by using whatever big names they could gather up and they performed well after the first month or so of that season. He also created the opportunity for Giannis to work with guys like KG. Kidd was an unmitigated disaster in Milwaukee, but I understand why he was appealing for the owners at the time of the hire and I can't fault them for it. They also got a bit unlucky. Without Jabari Parker suffering two knee injuries, he looked like he could have become a REALLY good player to play alongside Giannis. He made that stupid comment about defense, but he showed effort on defense, particularly in the post-season last year, the problem is, he was coming back from knee injuries. There's no reason to believe he couldn't have been a 20+ PPG scorer, a guy who gets you 8 boards a game and shoot 80/50/40 the way he was developing. So they got hurt there to. So the owners to this point, IN MY opinion, have hired a VERY bad HC, they hired a VERY good GM who hired a very good HC after that, they got a little unlucky when they ended up losing their #2 pick in the draft with very little production due to injuries. What they REALLY needed to do after the mess that came with hiring Horst was stabilize the organization and make the right decisions moving forward. I've mentioned a couple, but since then, they've done that. They didn't pay Jabari 40 million over 2 years just because he was the 2nd pick, they built a great roster around Giannis. The real question comes to this off-season. How committed are they? Are they willing to REALLY spend? Because CHL and I could argue for hours over which players are most important, but if they REALLY want a championship, they just give the GM-free range to sign everyone and go way into the luxury tax. That's unrealistic, but it'd be ideal. The next best would be to go well into that tax to at least bring back a good young core with Midd, Brogdon and yes, I know he's not popular right now, but Mirotic and then try to find a way to retain Lopez OR Hill one way or the other. They've done many things right in the past couple years, but now they need to show they're truly committed. This team, if it's kept together can grow and win title(S). It's up to the owners. If they bungle this off-season and try to save a few dollars, they're going to let the single most important NBA player get away like Cleveland did, except in this scenario, Giannis ain't coming back if he leaves because he doesn't have the same ties to Milwaukee. Now I can't speak to how much they believe their current success has to do with them, but I can say definitively how much their future success does. Like KGB says in Rounders, "Pay the man, pay the man his money." Of course in this case, it'd be men, and it'd be pay the men their money and then some because it's more important that we keep them than it is that we pay them exactly what they're worth. In a vaccum, Middleton either takes a 4 year 100 million dollar deal or he walks. Brogdon takes a 4 year 60 or he walks, Mirotic takes a 3 year 30 or he walks, but these players will determine what happens with Giannis. So if it takes going 20 into the luxury tax what's the alternative? Watching the Bucks brand new areana sit empty save for the games where LeBron, KD, Curry and....it makes me even sick to say it, but Giannis come to town? I doubt anyone made it this far, but here's another little anecdote on why I believe Middleton should be signed; He's a complete player. Game 5 when he had a straight jacket on him and couldn't get his shot going, he was finding people and getting rebounds and making things tough on Kawhi. We need him back here badly.

No, I don't believe he'll willingly quit the job at Texas for UW. UW cannot match Texas when it comes to finances and benefits and it's not even close. What I'm saying is I think he could get fired with another bad year and if the Badgers are awful with no recruits coming in, and Texas struggles again, it could lineup where he's out of a job and the Badgers have an opening. But of course I find it highly unlikely he'd choose to walk away from UT for a job at UW.

It's tough to tell. When you come to Wisconsin, you get a different type of recruit and you usually get 4 years to work with them. He's struggled at Texas(and most teams do get badly outcoached and outmanned vs Kansas). He did, however, outcoach Kansas on the biggest stage and when he was at VCU and had guys sticking around, he had a little more success. I'm not a big fan of the one and done guys. Even at Wisconsin. Much for the same reason that a KD to the NYN doesn't worry me. It takes more time to put in a system, learn it and develop chemistry. That's amplified when you play less than 40 games as opposed to the 90 or so a Knicks team would play with KD. I don't follow CBB near as close as others on here, so maybe the best bet would be to try to find our own Wright, Few, Stevens or someone else, but those are some pretty rare coaches. The other elite coaches either work for the elite programs or they use programs like UW as stepping stones. I'll really make some fellow UW alums sick when I float this idea, but I wouldn't be against a Tom Crean hire. Again, at Indiana, he "underperformed" with some top classes, but again, with those top classes, you get guys who have one eye on the NBA and the Krabbenhoft/Davidson types, the glue guys tend to get lost in the shuffle a bit.

Right, and again...what about the pitching? Since May 3rd we are top 3 in baseball in team era, before last 3 games we were number 1. I believe we need more pitching too, but a pitcher or two could come from within(Nelson Sanchez Rasmussen Perdomo) that’s not the case with our hitting. And Aguilar had a .427 OBP in May when you first posted this. And that didn't include the two big games he had at the end of April. Just picking a date and using a few weeks of data to analyze can cut both ways. Edit-From the end of April to today, Aguilar has been hitting .296/420/500. Given that EE is worse offensively, seems illogical to make this move now. I'm sure you would not agree when presented with the facts, right?

David Stearns has said repeatedly, he wants to wait until around Memorial Day to see how players/team does before he makes judgements on what to do moving forward. We’re there now. And unless moves are made( money spent )this team probably won’t make the wild card game. Imo the teams weaknesses: - Shaw’s hitting slump is so deep, he probably can’t recover from it this year, he needs to see a sports psychologist. - Aguilar needs to go, he’s almost as bad as Shaw, without the pedigree. - statistically the worst team in baseball at getting a runner in from 3rd with less than 2 out. Also, and just as important, manufacturing runs non- existent. I believe this teams pitching is good enough to win the division, but the aforementioned hitting issues will keep this team from beating out the cubbies. Right now there’s a pretty big gap between them. Imo Stearn’s has work to do, and zero prospect capital in which to fix the hitting issues. So that leaves taking on large contracts as the only way to solve our weaknesses. Now we can pretend Shaw will magically find his stroke, and Aguilar will suddenly lose 60 lbs so as not to clog the bases, since his power stroke is gone. Not sure that’s going to happen. Encarnacion is needed. Once again if done before July: Encarnacion + 5 mil. > Aguilar + Diplan I just shut off when I read things like this. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about OTHER than Shaw, who went to the DL is hitting poorly. Yet the same guy who played through a serious, life threatening illness to his child needs to see a sports psychologist?

One more year and time to see if Coach Smart is relieved of his coaching duties and willing to come home to UW the following year...if true. I was kinda hoping for another UVA early exit from the tourney to really throw some more coals under Bennett's seat, but that didn't work out.

After losing a shot to go to the finals, there's not much that's going to do anything for anyone the day after. But the difference between this team and any other Brewers/Bucks teams of the past is we've got "the guy" on our team. We've got Giannis. I don't know who has said that we'll have an improved supporting cast next year? I'm hoping we can retain most of our supporting cast next year and they'll learn and grow from this disappointing loss, but I haven't seen anyone talking about how much better the talent will be. I don't think it needs to be. I don't think we NEED to add much. Just keep most of who we have. Hopefully, some of the younger role players will improve and we'll be able to get something out of them. But mostly you're counting on Giannis being less one dimensional offensively by developing a better shot, this team being more experienced and not shooting poorly and little else.

Was it that Malika Andrews story on ESPN? I hope that was because Giannis was annoyed by the BS reporting and not because it was something that leaked from his camp. Though I really don't know how big of a camp he has that decides such things as he seems to keep things pretty close to his family. As much as one would think Giannis is loyal to the Bucks NBA players want to win and sadly it is fairly easy for them to get paid the most and get pretty easy championship runs by bolting. We will see how long he loves Milwaukee if they can’t even get to the finals. He doesn’t seem like the kind of guy to bolt that fast...but I guess you never know. But it isn't. He'll get paid the most by playing in Milwaukee. No team will be able to offer him nearly as much as the Bucks can.