coolhandluke121

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.

Offense so much better without the weak link Bledsoe gumming up everything.

Seems Bledsoe destroyed their rhythm with a couple bricked 3's he had no business taking or a bad turnover every time the Bucks were running away with it.

No turnovers this quarter, right? (Don't hate me if they turn it over 3 times in the last minute lol.)

I mean, even if he doesn't score at all, he's a HUGE factor just because of all the attention he gets, which creates so many open 3's. He's still their most valuable offensive player by far for that reason.

Giannis is subject to criticism. Really screws up the pace and tempo when he looks for offense that clearly isn't there. Just keep moving the ball and trust your shooters, even though they haven't shot well until today. Non-factor though? Oof.

Very alarming despite the lead. They're going to fall apart if they stop hitting 3's at a remarkable rate.

What do you do to keep it going when you're red hot from 3? Turn the ball over 8 times and then Bledsoe chucks a few. Genius.

Giannis has learned nothing from the last 3 games, has he? It's unbelievable.

Bledsoe needs to stop shooting 3's. For god's sake, just stop. Unless it's the only option at the end of the shot clock, just pass up the shot and look for something better.

Hate to admit it but yeah, they do seem to clench up badly sometimes. I still think they're the slightly better team and I have faith in them tonight though. Their 3's will start to fall.

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.

Sorry but that's just too long to reply to everything. I will say this though: why aren't all the worries about long-term financial health an argument in favor of keeping the guy on a 1-year deal? You would have Ersan and Hill off the books next summer, and it would be much easier to get out of Snell's contract with one year left than with two. If they did it right, they could get back under the tax threshold after just one year. Avoiding the repeater tax is a pretty big deal. They'd have the full MLE back, wouldn't lose the BAE, and would avoid some of the most severe escalating penalties. To the question about giving someone the full MLE before going over the tax threshold, I never said it isn't possible; it's just very unlikely and there's too much stuff out of your control that could go wrong. And they have to get rid of some salary or renounce some Bird Rights to even make it possible in the first place (right now their cap holds and salary have them over the tax line). And you run the risk of Brogdon signing an offer sheet or one of their free agents insisting that they want to sign early or they will go elsewhere rather than be in limbo. The bottom line is that there are a lot of moving parts and they aren't in control of what their free agents want to do. It really comes down to needs though. They need Hill desperately. He's been the only consistent, poised player in the playoffs (except Brogdon but he missed some games and was a mess in game 4). He plays two positions of need. He can do whatever the team needs him to do and fit in any lineup. Experience matters. Bledsoe is not always reliable, and I could not disagree more about Brogdon playing pg. If he has another position besides SG, it's SF. In fact, one could even argue that it's his best position. He's not nearly quick enough to play PG in this day and age, he often dribbles with his head down against pressure, and he has to turn his back to protect his dribble against quick defenders. It's not even remotely an option IMO. I would play him as a small-ball PF more than a PG honestly. Just give me Hill, a solid center on the taxpayer MLE (whether Lopez or someone else), Brogdon (because they can match offers and have control), and one of Niko or Khris depending on the market. I truly think that's the best team they can have next year if they refuse to have a top-5 payroll. I'll try Brown, Brogdon, DDV, and Snell at sf if Khris walks. I'll give Wilson and sometimes Brown time at PF if Niko walks. I don't see who they're getting at PG with a minimum contract if they cut Hill though.

They're tied for 14th in the regular season and they're 10th (out of 16 teams) in the postseason. Not good considering how many open looks they get because of Giannis's gravity. I really need to see a breakdown by open looks. I'm convinced that makes it even worse. For example, if one teams hits 37.5% of their open looks and 30% of their contested looks, but 2/3 of their attempts are open, they'll hit 35%, but a team that hits 40% of their open looks and 32.5% of their contested looks, but 1/3 of their attempts are open, will also shoot 35%.

I've said a few times that the Bucks are overrated shooters. They got so many wide open looks that even an average shooting team would have pretty good percentages. I think we're seeing some of that this series. Another issue is that they don't really move well off the ball and run their defenders through screens. Coaching is part of that, but I think a bigger issue is either lack of speed/energy or lack of basketball intelligence, depending on the player (Lopez lacks speed, Ersan isn't especially quick, Khris lacks energy, Bledsoe lacks the shot, and Mirotic shoots most of his 3's from the most inefficient spot on the floor).

It's the small ball that's killing him. No, he's definitely not this bad. It's a combination of being a tough match-up and him being used poorly. I'd match him up with Ibaka or Gasol once in a while. Both those guys are doing more damage shooting outside than in the paint anyway, and Mirotic is not lacking for toughness. It's quickness that's killing him.

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.

Also, this isn't actually over despite how it looks. In 2001 against the Hornets, the situation was eerily similar. The Bucks were a little better in the regular season, but the Hornets were better constructed for the playoffs. Ray and Glenn were in the 2nd round for the first time, and so was most of the supporting cast besides Cassell. The Bucks went up 2-0, but lost the next 3 and looked even worse than the final scores indicated. It was ugly. They shot around 40% combined in those 3 losses. Mashburn was killing Robinson. Baron Davis was killing Cassell. Ray was 20-53 from the field. They lost game 5 at home and we heard all the same stats we're hearing now about going down 3-2 and losing 80% of the time. They fell behind by about 15 at times in the first half in game 6. It looked completely hopeless. I don't remember the largest deficit, but they were down 10 at the half. Then a funny thing happened. They finally started hitting shots, like we knew they were capable of all along. All the other analysis went out the window, because it came down to that. Toronto is much better than the Hornets were, but these Bucks are also much than the 2001 team. In both cases, the teams are comparable enough that it's close to a toss-up who wins. Of course it's not a toss-up anymore, because the Raptors have a lead. But it's still a series, and if the Bucks have two good games shooting the ball, I bet they will win it.

Day after perspective: this is pretty normal for a team's first playoff run. I wanted to believe they were so good that they could bypass a few stages of development, but they've run up against a team that's roughly their equal but is more ready for the pressure. And I normally don't like to talk too much about "clutch" and "pressure", but it does seem to be affecting the Bucks. They need time to be desensitized to the high stakes. Look at how many years it took Lowry. A big concern is keeping the team together. Normally a young core grows together and you can keep them as restricted free agents, but this team has a lot of guys to pay. It's easy to give two or three perennial all-stars a max contract and fill out the roster around them. It's harder when you have so many guys worth more than the MLE but less than the max though.

You're probably just looking at some of the shots he made. Greg Monroe scored a lot too. There's an indirect domino effect of his lack of mobility that undermines the team and helps make things so easy for the other team. He's a better dinosaur than most centers like him but he's still a dinosaur. Just took better teams to expose him.

You still want to give Middleton a max contract? What? I had him at 4/$100 and said I'd give up if it went over 4/$120.

Bucks choked hard. Toronto is very good and give them credit, but the Bucks missed open looks and ft's that they made all year and they panicked and forced things leading to turnovers. Just want to see them play like they're capable of in game 6. Nothing to lose now so stop choking. Makes some off season decisions easier though. Keeping Hill was always a no-brainer. Lopez had a few good games but was a liability for much of the playoffs. Give him the taxpayer MLE at most, maybe not even that. Niko cost himself millions but I would keep him. It's him or nobody and he deserves a chance to redeem himself. Don't ever want to see him at SF again but I'm willing to bet this is the worst slump of his career.

The problem is bad shooting and lack of quickness/athleticism. And Toronto is a great team now that Lowry stopped choking in the playoffs.

Small ball Raptors continue to destroy the Bucks. Gotta counter with personnel changes. It's hubris to think you can keep playing the way you want, as if you're that much better than them.

Bledsoe getting more confidence in his shot is the worst thing that could have happened.