HiAndTight

If the Bucks front office does its job and puts a good supporting cast around Giannis, I think he stays. If he was a better player than Kawhi in this series, we're moving on and they're not. I don't think this escapes him and I'm sure he'll be better for it. As for the extension he signed, at the time it was reported by both sides that he took less than the max so the Bucks could keep players around him, but he would have been willing to sign for the max. I don't think he was looking ahead then and thinking about getting the supermax a year earlier when he signed that. It could end up being a major error on the Bucks end, similar to the Wolves when they did the same with Kevin Love if he doesn't re-sign here, but I'm pretty confident he'll be back next year and barring major injuries, this team will be in the finals and he'll re-sign.

At least a couple people said he was bad last night. Basically because of that one bad lob to Giannis and a missed 3 in the 4th. And this was not just during the game, which is an emotional reaction, but after the game that people said he was bad. Just went and looked back at the whole postgame on here. Did not really see anything overly critical of Hill after the game. I did include his name as a guy who didn't step up, but I included basically everyone in that when I said we needed one guy to step up and no one did. Same here. Sometimes things stand out to you(like when Hill turned his back dribbling the ball with Lowry pressuring him multiple times last night) just because they're on your head OR they stand out to you because you don't expect them to come from a certain player. Hill made a couple of poor plays last night. He kinda short-armed a bunny, on another I'm not sure what happened, he had a wide open corner 3, bobbled the ball and then caught it and by then he had forced it and there was the throwaway to Giannis. None of those are really bad plays(save for the last one, again, a play that was drawn up, but you expect the guy with 115 playoff games to see it's not that) they're just not playing you expect from the one vet who's been there. Hill played well in the playoffs. He wasn't to blame. I think you're letting your...affinity for Hill cloud your judgment here a bit. He's not immune to criticism. Not even Giannis is. The few things he did wrong though were in the course of a game and shouldn't really even be notable in an average game. Mirotic however. I think for this series, I'd rather we had Maker. (and anyone wondering if that should be in blue, it shouldn't be, given what Mirotic did, I'd have rather had a few minutes of Maker's length than Mirotic).

Not exactly venturing far out onto that limb there. But I won't predict win totals until I see what they do. And if there's any reason that Bled's struggles looked worse as the series went on, it was because Bud started trying to play him in shorter spurts. He also sat Mirotic.

The Badgers assistant coach was apparently in a bad car accident in Ann Arbor, Michigan. His 9-year-old daughter and his 46-year-old wife passed away. His 13-year-old son is expected to recover and he is expected to recover. My god...I woke up today worrying about how I'd get over the Bucks lost. This guy's life was just completely shattered. He had a partner, a 9-year-old daughter and not they're both gone and he's left to raise his son alone. That's just....well, there's really no words.

Yes. It comes down to getting acclimated to the high pressure and stakes. It's Toronto's turn. I logged in expecting to see lots of agendas. Most people pushing one agenda or another have a point, and it's mostly arguing about whether their pet issue was a bigger problem than someone else's, but I think it's mainly shooting (related to being tense under pressure) and inexperience. However, despite all the agendas, I was not prepared to log in and see people complain about Hill. That's mind-boggling. Over 50% from the field, 40% from 3, and 85% from the line in the series. 10.7 ppg and 4.7 rpg as a back-up. 15 assists, 10 steals, and, incredibly, just TWO TURNOVERS IN THE ENTIRE SERIES against a great defense. Great defense all series with less than 2 personal fouls a game against a team that was otherwise killing the Bucks at the line. Literally every single problem the Bucks had all series, Hill was one of the few players, if not the only player, fixing the problem instead of compounding it. It's just unbelievable that anyone would have the audacity to whine about one 4-10 game considering all the other issues the Bucks had. And it speaks to my point and yours about the importance of experience. Where are all the complaints about Hill? Are you maybe going back and reading them from the time they happened? He made a couple of bad plays down the stretch and I saw someone mention that we can't afford to have Hill screwing up right now. I didn't see many people on Hill. I've also determined I no longer know what they call a turnover. Hill had more than two times he turned the ball over. But no, Hill was pretty good this series. He certainly didn't cost them anything. I wish he'd have not thrown the ball up to Giannis in the middle of 4 long Raptors, but that was likely the play called coming out of the TO. Hill was definitely an asset. He wasn't a flawless one, but certainly helped more than he hurt anything during this series and maybe I missed it, but I haven't seen anyone disagree. Hill's experience was huge. The experience this team got was huge as well. I'm not sure it'll matter for Bledsoe, but I do think it'll matter for Giannis, Brogdon, Middleton, etc...etc... There really is only one player I'm willing to point at and say, "that guy hurt us," and that's Mirotic. I won't even say it about Bledsoe because he's by far our best perimeter defender(and we have good perimeter defenders).

I don't. Giannis is the single best asset in the entire NBA. Really hard to blame them for not topping that in 5 years. And then I'd say they've brought a pretty biggest asset to the Bucks by helping them build a stadium. Or adding a full supporting cast of players around those two. Or coach Bud.

We played very good D, we got to the loose balls, VanVleet is just hitting them from 30 feet. There's not much you're going to be able to do if he keeps that up. But the Bucks are playing hard, they look like they're playing more confident and as long as we can start out the 3rd strong, we'll be alright.

They have just about every time he's hasn't shot it from 4 feet outside the 3 point line. I also saw the Giannis-non factor comment. I won't even post what I thought about that.

43. They corrected the 3 finally, but I believe it's a 7 point lead.

Yeah, I'd take that to if your choices are players who didn't pan out. I'd take the SHOT of the 38th pick in the draft, especially with the Brewers ability to unearth college arms in that range in recent years with Burnes, Woodruff, and others. And can we officially NEVER list his war in the same sentence as Kimbrel, Knebel, Jeffress and Hader again? I said it before and I'll repeat myself, I'd gladly take Dan Jennings and the 38th pick over him.

There is nothing controversial about the take that Bledsoe has been bad in the ECF. I never disputed that or tried to make a case otherwise. What is controversial, or at the very least far from certain, is if those struggles in a very small number of games automatically equates to him not being able to handle pressure, which is the assertion made in the thread title. As far as Bud goes, I'm not saying he can or can't handle pressure because I don't believe there is any way to truly know, but the facts are the facts in ATL... His teams got worse every year following their unexpected 60 win season. He acquired Dwight Howard on purpose. He got stripped of POBO. We'll see how Saturday (& hopefully Monday after that) goes, but if Bud comes out doing the same things he's done the last three games & just hopes that it works this time, a case could be made that his response to the specific pressures of the 2019 ECF were more detrimental than Bledsoe's were. I think the only thing that's controversial is using any stats from such a small sample size. Just watching him play though when the pressure is on, he's been bad. I don't think that's controversial. As for Bud in Atlanta, the only thing you've mentioned that holds water is that he erred in bringing in Howard. Otherwise, his teams overperformed. Just because he coaches what should be a mid 40 win team to 60 wins doesn't mean he's to blame when that team loses to a LeBron led team in the finals or that it's his fault that the team predictably regresses. The Bucks exceeded expectations this year, yet rather than using that as evidence that he's succeeded, you're instead using it as a POTENTIAL reason for why he's choking, despite the fact that the Raptors were a mere two games behind them and they rested their all-star players and key players far more than we did. In other words, it'd be really easy to see the Bucks as the 58 win team and the Raptors as the 60 win team in which case, there'd be nothing to be used against him. Honestly though, looking at those Atlanta teams, I don't see how an intellectually honest argument could ever be made that he underperformed at ANY point with the Hawks as their head coach. And then there's also the respect he earned working as a long time assistant to the man who's generally considered the best coach in the NBA in SA.

I think everyone who's watched this series would agree. I'm just trying to pretend this not the case and that Giannis will be the first superstar(at least that I can think of) that can take his team to the finals and overcome the adversity he has on the fly. Caught a segment in which they were talking about Giannis and they mentioned how LeBron had to deal with the same things when they lost to the Spurs in the 2004 finals. The Spurs "built a wall," to stop him from getting to the rim. But hey, Mirotic comes out hitting 3's and the advantage tilts back to us. I only keep mentioning him because he's the guy who has the post-season experience, he's played well prior to this series and he's very capable of turning it around. And it'd be far less surprising than VanVleet doing so. That and I don't think there's any other individual who's performed that far below expectations. Giannis has put up far worse numbers or had less of an impact on games in this series, but that'll happen when you're the superstar and the other team has a superstar equal to you(at least equal, probably just a shade better at this very moment) who can defend him like no other player in the league can. Play aggressive, but walk that fine line between playing out of control to cut down on Bled and Giannis dribbing into a wall of Raptors and then making poor passes or turning the ball over and someone gets hot and we'll be fine. I suppose depending on who Kawhi is guarding, Middleton needs to score quite a bit more as well. But he needs to do so on pick and pops, screens...basically catch and shoots. He's struggling, again, especially when Kawhi is guarding him to get his shot. Also, I know they won't do this, but it really wouldn't be the worse thing to run the offense through Lopez just once in a while. Put him on the block, spread the floor and get other guys moving, cutting. I don't expect him to be able to score on Gasol and Ibaka regularly, but that IS what he's done most of his career and he's pretty good at it. And he's a good passing big. Not Gasol good, but pretty good.

I agree with everything else you said except for this. Giannis played fewer minutes than just about any other superstar(per game) and they sat him when he had any minor issues to keep him fresh. They went 10-11 deep all year long. They just played smart all year. That's why I don't agree that it's unlikely that they'll be able to approximate this level of success in the future(provided we have a healthy Giannis). The playoff experience has been enormous though. I'd kinda like to see Giannis come out and take a couple of catch and shoot threes. He's been looking better shooting in that lone regard lately. I don't think a couple 3's are going to cause the Raptors to abandon their strategy with him, but it may cause a little bit of hesitation. Maybe it'll free him up and he won't short arm some of those FT's or shots around the restricted area.

Plagiarism! Is that allowed here? The abnormally bad shooting is the most important parallel in my opinion. Will it finally end Saturday? I need it to. My soul hurts. It'd be 90 pct sure it would if this wasn't a young team going into a tough game 6 on the road facing elimination. It'll take a hot start. That said, my flight is booked for Milwaukee and I plan on being there for Monday. We just need everyone to keep playing the same except for one guy, maybe Mirotic, maybe Giannis(he HAS absolutely been very good this series, just not arguably best player great), whoever. Someone provides a spark and I think it'll have a ripple effect. We also can't afford a bad game from Hill or Brogdon. Each has been very good save for one game each this post-season. The only question I'd have is how to deal with Kawhi. I haven't watched him a ton in his career, but this looks like the best he's played in terms of driving and then kicking when the help comes. An evolution in his game maybe.

Because that's not my argument. My argument is that because we're going to be over the cap for the foreseeable future and because we have very few assets, it's either keep the guys now, or lose them forever and we're not going to be able to clear cap room to sign anyone while we still have Giannis here. That's what it comes down to. I'm not worried about long term financial health, I'm worried about keeping our team together long term and this is the summer that is going to determine that. And I just don't agree with you on Hill or entirely on Brogdon. We've been through that enough, it's not worth going back and forth. He's been a very steady player in the post-season, he's had some very poor games himself, but he has been a much better post-season player and a vet with experience. I think Brogdon has shown he can play the point. He does not have the on ball quickness, but he's longer and he's more physical and that can make up for that. And it's certainly not as if Hill is equal to Bledsoe at this point in his career in terms of quickness. But I've said this time and time again. Offensively, we just disagree. Brogdon is a very good passer, he's very good at beating his guy and getting into the lane and finishing there or kicking it out. Hill has performed much better in the playoffs than regular season. Compare what they've both done. Claiming he has to turn his back to the defender to protect the ball is a gross exaggeration. He's had to do it at times if Lowry or someone gets a hand in there, but Hill had to do the same thing multiple times in game 4. But again, this is becoming more positionless basketball. Both guards handle the ball regularly. Brogdon has a assist rate of nearly 21 pct while on the floor up from Hill at 16. He's averaging 3.9 asst per game to 2.7 I think for Hill. If Brogdon was a comically bad with the ball in his hands as you're suggesting, it's fair to say he'd have gotten exposed a bit more. Now mind you, I never said he was a better PG than Hill and those stats are obviously very small snippets, but they're not quite telling the story you're telling of a guy who is woefully incapable of handling the ball against pressure and who is waaay too slow to defend PG's. He has to defend differently than Bled and Hill, but he can get physical with them and stop them and contest every shot because he's stronger and longer and much quicker than you give him credit for. But really, my foot is almost through this horse. We don't' agree. I respect that. You see something different than I do. I see a deceptively quick defender who's stronger, you see far less with regard to that position. Let stop arguing what really does appear to be the few things we don't agree on. But for the long term health of the Bucks, I'm prioritizing multiple years of Middleton and Brogdon, then Mirotic over 1 year of Hill. And I think we can agree that Middleton is probably going to be overpaid and Hill is going to be overpaid. So I'd rather keep the All-Star who's overpaid, not the backup PG who's overpaid-AS IMPORTANT as a veteran PG is and a good one like Hill. I still value that #2 option more. Edit-If Hill was 27 and we were talking about him being an effective player for the next 4-5 years, that'd be different, but in this scenario, we're talking about ONE year of Hill vs 5 years of Middleton. Again, I don't care about the Bucks long term financial health as it's pretty much sealed after this off-season. It's just a matter of who they sign and who they decide to let go. I think letting go Middelton in favor of Hill would be short sighted. I think we probably disagree about Middleton as well. Unless I'm mistaken, you said something about him not having the energy to run off screens and move without the ball. I don't agree. He looks very nonchalant out there, but he's often defending the other teams best player and I think he plays smart and hard. And I think he'd be FAR tougher to replace. I don't think that a group of Snell, Brown, Wilson or whoever else was mentioned could come close. But you're also forgetting this. Regardless of what we think of him, the one person's opinion who's probably the most important about Middleton is Giannis. I'm sure there will be people who want to dismiss what he has to say because it's not his job to decide who we keep, etc..etc.., but you come back to Giannis after just falling short of the finals and say, "we thought Middleton was worth 26 million, not 30 million so we let him go and the guy who's going to take his place is Tony Snell for the time being," well then he gets more upset. More upset than when Thon or Kidd left, more upset than when Monroe left. That's the second best player on his team according to him at the very least(and I think that's generally the consensus). Now Giannis who was happy staying in the small market and wasn't the type to go looking for the big city may change is mind as his first priority has always been winning. As for who they could get if they decline Hill's option, I listed quite a few quys who'd be options for the MLE. You're talking about the minimum. I don't know what position you can plan to get someone at the minimum.

Yup other than game 4, defense has not been the issue. Even in that game, the Raptors only shot 34 pct from 3. For a point of reference, they shot 35 pct from 3 the 1st game when we beat them. The difference? We had 15 more rebounds than them. Not saying the defense wasn't a problem in game 4, just not in the way some just keeps repeating.

Sweet straw man. But for the millionth time, literally none of the data in this series would support the argument that leaving guys "wide open for threes" is why they are going to lose. TOR is hitting them at about the same clip everybody else did. You know what isn't happening the same? The Bucks making their own shots. I don't know how much clearer we could have made it. We both posted the stats that disprove this theory at almost the exact same time. We laid out the pct's from the first four games and pointed out that there was very little difference and he just persists. He also seems to think that you can be successful playing man D on every single player, no matter if that's Kawhi or VanVleet. Oh, and didn't you know, the Bucks just didn't WANT to get a hand in his face. It's not that they were helping out on Kawhi and the Raptors did a good job-making the extra pass and a guy who was shooting 12.....TWELVE pct from 3 until game 4 of the ECF's suddenly hit 7 out of 9. Once you've decided something is the problem, you just find a walll...preferably brick, bend at the waste and get a 5-6 foot head start and run into it as hard as you can. Rinse and repeat(and repeat and repeat and repeat).

I would be shocked to find that's the case. The Raptors used Kawhi on Middleton probably more than they did Giannis. He didn't have room to breathe all game long and as such, he just didn't take many shots. He's definitely capable of making the contested shots, but when I see him with an open look...something you very seldom see, I probably feel better with him taking it than anyone not named Brogdon. The good news is the one type of player you can pretty much always find is that Kyle Korver type shooter. At least if you're a contender. It just doesn't always work out. I think that's what the Raptors thought they were getting in Danny Green who hit 46 pct of his 3's this year yet has been awful in the playofs.

Right, but I'm not talking about his Euro step per say. Just when he's riving to the lane. Part of it is that he's out of control and he losses the dribble a bit and has to go down to get it, but I also feel like I remember him kinda tucking it away or holding it chest high when he starts his steps and in this serires if feels like he has to bring the ball all the way up when he's ready to explode to the rim.

The main reason is that it's earmarked for Lopez. You may not recall, but I actually proposed that as an alternative option that might be bearable for everyone when the argument got really heated. But I don't think many people consider Hill that much more important than Lopez, and my argument is still that they should pay the luxury tax through the nose for a year and keep all of them. But a more important reason is that they can't count on having the full MLE, and Hill could easily get some other contender's full MLE. No reason to believe he would settle for the taxpayer MLE from the Bucks. This is the same guy who turned down a 4/$88m extension from the Jazz in an effort to extract every dollar possible. He didn't get the payday he was looking for in free agency, so I would bet against him accepting a bargain deal this time around. He hasn't earned that much. Never had a huge contract like Brooklyn gave Lopez, for example. And even if they free up enough to guarantee the full MLE (Snell + Pat C + pick #30 to a team with cap space for their 2nd-round pick?), they would lose the full MLE as soon as Brogdon signs an offer sheet. There's a lot of moving parts and too much to juggle. They could end up with a lot of egg on their face. Every free agent has the ability to hold them hostage, intentionally or not. Hill is the only one who doesn't because it's a team option, and he's easily worth 1/$18m in a vacuum. It's only the Bucks' cap situation that makes people question whether he's worth it, but that should make them question one of two of the other guys more than they question Hill because he has been their 2nd-best player throughout the playoffs and was arguably 2nd or 3rd when he got more opportunities because of Brogdon's injury in the regular season as well. If a huge tax bill is not an option, I would just pick up Hill's option, accept that you're only going to have the taxpayer MLE, offer it to Lopez, give it to some other big if he declines (I think a lot of serviceable centers would see what the Bucks did for Lopez and love the same opportunity), match offers for Brogdon, and just accept that you're going to lose a good player in free agency. You're losing a good player if you don't pick up Hill's option anyway. Just let whoever asks for too much walk. If Khris is asking for more than $30m a year, keep Niko. If Niko is asking for more than his current contract, keep Khris. Once one walks, you can offer the other one a little more. If both accept team-friendly deals, then keep both, but I'm not holding my breath. The main reason is that it's earmarked for Lopez. You may not recall, but I actually proposed that as an alternative option that might be bearable for everyone when the argument got really heated. But I don't think many people consider Hill that much more important than Lopez, and my argument is still that they should pay the luxury tax through the nose for a year and keep all of them. I do not recall. But he's a good fit there. I'd love to bring this exact same team back next year, but they're already sitting at 135 without Brogdon and with Middleton having a cap hold of 13 million IIRC. And that tax is only going to get worse. I don't think you approach Giannis with anything BUT the Super-max. Maybe there's a chance he is willing to take less(I actually don't even know if they could still offer him the "max" and get that 5th year or if they offer less than the supermax can they only get the 4 years), but as much as we love to talk about him living with his parents and being grounded, he's not a naive kid. I don't think he'd pass up on that type of money-super max vs the max- We have 1 1/2 point guards without Hill. I'm not counting Frazier, I'm counting Brogdon. He can run the point, he's a good passer, he's able to penetrate pretty well and he's a bigger physical guard with a big wing span, but he's not really a true PG and I think he works much better starting at the 2 anyway. Not that it means a whole lot with the position-less basketball today. But we ned multiple guys capable of playing the point more than we need a 7 footer who can knock down 3's. I also don't really think Lopez is going to be getting big offers this off-season. There are a lot of solid players on the market. Maybe he likes it here and is willing to sign for the Not-Qualified Vets exemption or whatever which is 120 pct of his current salary. [sarcasm]Maybe talk to the owner of the Harbor Front Condo's into giving him a free one like they're trying to do with Kawhi in Toronto![/sarcasm] But a more important reason is that they can't count on having the full MLE, and Hill could easily get some other contender's full MLE. No reason to believe he would settle for the taxpayer MLE from the Bucks. This is the same guy who turned down a 4/$88m extension from the Jazz in an effort to extract every dollar possible. He didn't get the payday he was looking for in free agency, so I would bet against him accepting a bargain deal this time around. He hasn't earned that much. Never had a huge contract like Brooklyn gave Lopez, for example. I was hoping if they signed the players in the right order maybe he'd sign while we still qualified for the regular MLE. Apparently, you can't manipulate the contracts like that? Turning down that 4/88 from Utah has to sting though. That's the off-season where everyone was spending like drunk sailors at a whore house. I remember articles talking about how we signed two pretty good deals(Delly and Telly). And while they weren't, they were compared to some others that were signed. I wouldn't blame him for holding out for every penny. We believe he's got a future as a coach or anaylyst or whatever, but he's gotta get his money now. NBA reference shows his career earnings at about 65 million dollars. If he'd made 150, it'd be different, but that money disappears quickly. And even if they free up enough to guarantee the full MLE (Snell + Pat C + pick #30 to a team with cap space for their 2nd-round pick?), they would lose the full MLE as soon as Brogdon signs an offer sheet. There's a lot of moving parts and too much to juggle. They could end up with a lot of egg on their face. Every free agent has the ability to hold them hostage, intentionally or not. Hill is the only one who doesn't because it's a team option, and he's easily worth 1/$18m in a vacuum. It's only the Bucks' cap situation that makes people question whether he's worth it, but that should make them question one of two of the other guys more than they question Hill because he has been their 2nd-best player throughout the playoffs and was arguably 2nd or 3rd when he got more opportunities because of Brogdon's injury in the regular season as well. Well, that wouldn't be worth it then. Pat C is a valuable rotation guy, we need to hit on that pick and get a good role player. I'm under no illusions that we'll get the next Capella, but the two bigs I mentioned, Fernando and Gafford could be important role players. Worth if it it assures you of being able to offer that, but not if you're going to lose it once Brogdon signs. We don't completely see eye to eye on the exact values of the players on the team, but I think Brogdon made himself some extra money with a great playoff run of his own. And being able to play Kawhi tough and then come back and play smaller quicker PG's adequately. Throw in 44 pct from 3 or whatever he is, and his ability to get to the basket and I think someone's gonna offer him 4/60 or so. And I kinda think the Bucks have to match. And the thing that makes me question if Hill is worth it is very simple. You'd be swapping out one year of a 34 year old PG for 4-5 years of much younger players. The window I'm looking at is Giannis and if the Bucks had any other assets that'd be different. If they had the foresight to make some of the moves Boston did and they were able to add a guy like Tatum to a team that's already contending(not him per say, but a very talented player or high draft pick). But they bungled the rebuild so badly up until Horst took over, he's been working on fumes and making things appear out of almost nowhere. The Mirotic trade felt like a video game trade. "These two young guys and 4 second round picks." It's kinda ridiculous. MY bottom line is this, they have almost zero assets for the next couple years. They'll have this years pick and they don't have the assets to make any moves after that. Any of consequence anyway. Maybe they sign a guy who was just bought out at some point, but the future will be very tough on Horst. So I can't justify passing on the younger guys in favor of the older guy for one year. I think Middleton and Brogdon are better, but it's impossible to quantify the value of having an experienced backup PG. If a huge tax bill is not an option, I would just pick up Hill's option, accept that you're only going to have the taxpayer MLE, offer it to Lopez, give it to some other big if he declines (I think a lot of serviceable centers would see what the Bucks did for Lopez and love the same opportunity), match offers for Brogdon, and just accept that you're going to lose a good player in free agency. You're losing a good player if you don't pick up Hill's option anyway. Just let whoever asks for too much walk. If Khris is asking for more than $30m a year, keep Niko. If Niko is asking for more than his current contract, keep Khris. Once one walks, you can offer the other one a little more. If both accept team-friendly deals, then keep both, but I'm not holding my breath. I just don't see how you replace Middleton. He isn't a great player, but he's a very-very good player. I think he's quite a bit better than Hill personally. I understand you don't see it that way, but they had Kawhi on him for long periods last night for a reason. And he is normally fine shooting contested shots. If you take him away from this team, I think it fundamentally alters the trajectory of the franchise moving forward. 6'8 SG/SF's who have the length he has, the ability to defend, rebound, and perhaps most importantly, score in the half court on this team, one of the few guys who can do it. I'll gladly let Mirotic go and overpay Middleton. I know Ersan can't do quite what Mirotic can, but between he and Wilson, you can cover that loss far better than you can with say, Snell and Brown. Snell was signed because he played so good when Middleton was hurt, but that was both a couple years ago and a big drop off. I can't see them getting past the loss of Middleton. I'd prefer Hill back, but we just differ when it comes to the sacrifices we think we should make in order for that to happen. Hill's primary value at this point is as a veteran, playoff experienced PG. If he can't be had, I'd try my luck with Rondo who has been a really good PG in the playoffs, Rubio, or Patrick Beveryly. They're different PG's, Rondo is obviously not the on-ball defender he once was and that was never great, but he's great at getting in the passing lanes. He is a brilliant passer along with Rubio. This wouldn't even be that big of a concern is Bledsoe hadn't looked so lost at times in this post-season. I'd then be all for drafting a PG, but I just don't know enough about the PG's that could be available, but I wouldn't want to count on them in crunch time. I suppose if things don't work out with Hill, they'll have a full season to try and find a dependable backup PG so Brogdon doesn't have to serve in that role.

You aren't wrong, but there have been plenty of times where Giannis draws that and needs to pass but instead Bledsoes his way to the basket and either coughs up the ball or gets fouled and doesn't convert. That's been his biggest weakness in this series. He was able to overcome it in the Boston series after Game 1, but he's still forcing too much. One other thing that's stuck out to me, and again, I didn't coach Basketball, just been a fan for a long time, so I could be wrong on this, but it appears to me that when he's driving and he picks up the ball, he's usually not holding the ball high where he can elevate and either make a pass or shot a 8 footer cleanly. He's going down and trying to come up strong and getting the ball stripped or deflected when he goes to pass. Same thing Bledsoe's doing to a degree, but the difference is about 10 inches. The Raptors, namely Kawhi and to a lesser degree Siakam among their bigs have really good hands, so maybe he's worried about getting it stripped. I don't know, maybe someone who's coached the game can tell me if I'm off on this one or not.

No question. Let see Middleton step up and earn that Max contract! Not that he could earn it in two games, but we'd certainly feel better about giving it to him. I don't really agree with Pina's reasons why the Bucks have lost, ie, giving up 3 pointers. They haven't really given up more this series than the rest of the series, but I do wonder if he's not right about maybe giving Wilson a little run out there when Ibaka comes in. I know he'd get abused on the block, but his quickness may be helpful. Or hell, maybe Mirotic starts playing well. He's got a history of performing in the post-season and he's a sneaky good defender from what I've seen, not the David Lee-esque Matador that he's looked like at times. In order for the Bucks to come back, I think the most important guy is Middleton and then we need to find another guy to hit some big shots. You can count on Hill and Brogdon in this series, but we need one of our bigs to start shooting better.

Kawhi was on him most of the night and was amazing. Middleton to his credit didn't force bad shots, he facilitated and did a very good job doing so IMO.

I think it'd have been more cathartic if they hadn't gotten up 2-0 in the first place. I think if they lost a tough game 1, then lost the OT game, and last nights game people would be more inclined to look at it as though they just ran into a better team and they didn't have the experiance. Going up 2-0 and then losing 3 straight, two of which you could have won if you'd knocked down a few shots was the least cathartic way for them to lose in my eyes. As for them being there for the next 6 years, I believe they will. Short of an injury to Giannis-God forbid-I think they'll be a team that's in the 50's in wins every year and they should compete for the top seed. Certainly through his 20's. That's assuming he stays here, but he's given every indication he's going to stick around, so no reason to worry about that in my mind. I do think they found a couple of really nice, solid players in Brown and Wilson who will be good bench players in the future. I'd hope DDV would as well, but I haven't seen it yet. And despite others reservations about Horst, he already showed this year he was able to pull a couple rabbits from a hat when he dumped Henson and Delly for just a 1st and then got Hill back to match the salaries and also provide a huge boost in the post-season especially when he was able to come in for Bled when he was struggling. He's been able to calm us down all post-season. Without trying to start an argument, I don't believe we'll be much different next year with or without him. But come playoff time, you need some veteran leadership. That's why I'm wondering aloud if there's some way we could add Rondo. He's not a guy who's going to get a big contract and there aren't many teams looking for a player his age and on the downside of his career, but he's such a smart player, he's improved as a shooter and he's a great passer. His character concerns seem to be subsiding as he gets older. There are a lot of good PG's who are FA's this year. Rondo, Beverly, Rubio. I'd really like to see us get someone who's better at running the pick and roll, throw that wrinkle into the equation much more next year to free Giannis up a bit. I know watching the Houston series I just felt bad for Chris Paul. He's totally wasted on that team. There's almost zero chance he comes here unless the Bucks decide to sign and trade Middleton and Brogdon to Houston and take on a 35 year old PG with an injury history, but man, there's not a worse situation for him in the entire NBA than playing with Houston whereas having him, even at this diminished stage in his career in Milwaukee would be such a huge boost, I think you'd be able to get away with losing Midds and Brogdon. Again, totally, 99.9999 pct unrealistic and so far fetched, but just reading these reports about him not liking how the offense is run in Houston and really just since watching that series I've thought it was almost sad to watch a all time great PG finish out his career being totally mis-used with Harden handling the ball the majority of the time and his skill set going to waste by in large. Now I've reached the point of rambling, so I'll stop. Not sure those couple hours of sleep were enough for me to completely get those adult drinks out of my system.

That's exactly it. The Bucks run isn't over. This isn't 2001 where we'll trade Giannis for another PG that does not want to come here and is well past his prime, trade away our 2nd best player and then just watch our coach walk away. It definitely is a problem the players we have around Giannis, but when you've got a talent like Giannis, I don't think you need another Max type player. He's going to improve, he's going to get better. Does anyone want to bet against a pissed off Giannis coming back next year as the exact same player? He hasn't done it yet in his career. And Bledsoe showed us something last night. In a huge game, he performed well. Giannis, Middleton, even if you have to pay him the max, Brogdon and I agree with you on Mirotic. We can just agree to disagree on Hill as I think the Bucks would have to move on from one of the two younger more important players for the next several years, not just next year. But if the Bucks owners want to spend the money to bring Hill back and they don't lose Brogdon or Middleton, I could live with that. I don't think this is a one and done situation. Not in the NBA and not with a guy who if he isn't the best player in the world right now...and I'd rank him just a tier below the top 3 now(LeBron, KD and Kawhi) just for the simple reason that the offense runs through him and his shot isn't quite there yet. But it's improving. But touching on your point about the experience, even more, Kawhi, Finals MVP, played in SA where they were consistently in the post-season making runs. Ibaka, his years in OKC where they made deep runs and then Toronto when the only team they couldn't get past was LeBron's team. Gasol, best player arguably on a team that played in the conference finals. Lowry has been there multiple times. Even guys like Green have a long history of playing playoff basketball. The Bucks? Hill has a ton of experience. Mirotic has quite a bit, but never really on a team that was expected to win. Beyond that, there's very little. That said, we're definitely not done in this series. This is a resilient team. There's no way VanVleet goes off again like he did last game and there's no way Middleton doesn't shoot the ball better(though he had a really nice game overall and played smart basketball, he's too important to the way we play, we need him to score). We win ONE game in Toronto and now Toronto is back in the hot seat having to come back to Milwaukee. As for Hill, let's say for argument's sake, the Bucks do decline his option. Is there any reason they can't offer him the MLE? It would take away a huge weapon in Lopez, not being able to offer him that and I don't think we can sign him to a regular contract as I don't think we own his Bird rights, but with Ersan, hopefully Mirotic, Giannis, Wilson and then possibly a guy like Gafford of Fernando in the draft, a guy who won't be able to stretch the floor like Brook, but guys who have at least the potential to develop into a poor man Clint Capella type or maybe a Looney type player and could at least provide some rim protection and rebounding next year, might they be better off going with that moving forward? At least you'd avoid the scenario we saw several times last night when Lopez switches on Leonard at the top of the key and Kawhi just has him on a string before pulling up for an easy 3. Of we just go without a big man and wait to see who becomes available during the season with buyouts even. And in the scenario that doesn't work out....do you think a guy like Rondo would be a good guy to target? I know this is hypothetical because you believe they'll pick up Hill's option, but on the off chance that they don't, what would you look for? I think a big man is more likely to fill a role in the draft than any PG we'd get. Maybe we try to buy a teams 2nd rounder if they like a PG they can develop.