BrewerFan

That was a LOT. The bubble, then an abnormally short post-season. Throw the Olympics in there and the Bucks weren't getting any time off. Also, if Middleton can come back and play a full season. How he played in the post-season this year was encouraging. If Beauchamp or Portis and the supporting cast. The big thing though, I just don't think you can break basketball down like you do Baseball. It's not individual matchups. In those post-season numbers for Jokic, he's not facing the same defenses. We saw what Giannis did vs the Suns. The Warriors were another team that did not have much inside resistance. Especially when you contrast that to what Giannis has with the Celtics, the Raptors when they had Kawhi, Gasol and Ibaka was still playing well defensively. Finally...I REALLY think trying to break down the best player into minutes played or games with Giannis is a little silly. You're not talking about Ben Simmons. The Bucks are extremely cautious(as they should be) with a generational talent. Jokic isn't running guys down like LeBron when, for example he got Bridges in the finals that's forgotten about as the play where he stops Booker and then goes up and gets Ayton was such an freakish play, they were asking if that was the best play in finals history the following day. In any event, there are two different conversations. Can the Bucks win again. Can they add teammates who will hit their shots, take pressure off Giannis as Murray does(and Middleton has) and who's the better player between the two. Throw Giannis on GSW, change nothing and he's going to be an even more efficient scorer and I'm pretty certain he'd widely be considered the best still. A playoff run like each have had most certainly cements your legacy, but it also leads to overreactions. With Giannis, as I said, it was "Is he a top 10 player all time already," and Jokic I saw a clip Richard Jefferson said he was KD scoring, Magic passing, Duncan rebounding and Steph shooting(though he at least added the caveat that Steph shot more often, so just as good, not better). You can certainly make an argument for Jokic right now. That's not crazy. I'd disagree, but Jokic is an incredibly skilled player. I don't think you can take what Giannis does on both ends and say it's so obvious it's not debatable.

In something that's actually news...aside from the "best shape of my life," platitudes, Bakhtiari is taking reps in team activities. That's a pretty big deal. You'd assume if he wasn't absolutely 100%, they wouldn't risk him in off-season activities that...he really doesn't need to be a part of. Perhaps confirmation that Gutekunst was telling the truth when he said they have "zero long term concerns about Bahktiari's health). All the talk about Love's weapons is great, but we know there's no greater weapon for a young QB than a great OL. Bakh/Jenkins all the way back healthy, and then some combination of Tom, Myers, JRJ, NIjman, maybe Jones or Walker(Jones is apparently weighing around 350, so he MIGHT actually be in the best shape of his life, though I remain skeptical). A more simplified, strictly MLF offense, experienced OL, an Elite RB and then Dillon trying to redeem himself from last year and explosive young WRers, If the OL holds up, that's everything a young QB needs to get a fair shot...and frankly more than just about any other 1st year QB gets.

I completely agree. The schedule the Packers have, they could(should) win at least ~8 games and could get to 9 or even 10(so I guess we disagree a bit there) But I'm not nearly as interested in the Packers win total as I am Love. We could win 10 games and be in a worse place than we were after Rodgers rookie season. You saw it quickly. You saw the discipline, you saw the big time throws, how elusive he was(I'm thinking of that NFCCG vs ATL where Rodgers was ducking free runners like he was Lamar). You knew. The team wasn't there yet, but you knew. That's all this year is about. Development and gauging who should be in the long term plans. If Love is the guy, the Packers are set up almost perfectly. 7-8 young targets with a TON of athletic ability, they can figure out who will separate themselves(Toure seems to be the guy the Packers FO mentions unprompted every time they talk about the team). Likely 2 1sts to hopefully fill out the team. Maybe a LT, keep building that DL, but they've got the answer to the big question. That's the best case clearly. The worst case is a Trey Lance type season. Not even in the sense that he suffers an injury, but just one in which they come out not knowing. The 2024 draft will be the "Caleb Williams" draft. I see mocks with Maye going ahead of him, I don't buy it. So hopefully either proves he's the guy and will continue to improve or we figure out definitively he is not. I believe in Jordan Love, HOWEVER, if he's just not the answer, I don't think making a huge investment in trading up to get him would be a bad idea. He's special. He's got a Mahomes type quality to him. Probably more athletic, so, so accurate and a QB in the Peyton, Luck, Lawrence mold...in that you know they're going to hit. It'll likely take a kings ransom(way too premature, but I'd guess both 1sts+2 more), But that's truly putting the cart before the horse. Either way, it'll be a fun year. See if Watson, Doubs, Musgrave, LVN, Tom can do, can Stokes get back to his rookie form, if a guy like Caleb Jones forces his way into the lineup. Who knows...maybe Love come out and he IS like Mahomes and he sets the league on fire in a weak NFC...50 TDs, 12 picks, 5000+ yards. Is that asking too much?

Well...I don't agree with the first statement...I don't think the best player on the team that wins the final is just anointed the best player. The game is played on both ends, not just the offensive side. I can certainly see an argument for Jokic, but the idea that there is this clear and obvious separation is as...unreasonable as the statement that the Giannis who won 2X MVP or FMVP, DPOY, etc..."ain't coming back." Put Giannis on a team with Murray, Porter Jr, Gordon, KCP and he's "clearly" the #1 player. Jokic is a more skilled offensively. That is clear. But the same can be said for Curry...arguably Embiid or Tatum. Giannis is still the best OVERALL player. This feels like a First Take type of reaction. I recall just 2 years ago they were asking if Giannis was already a top 10 player of all-time. I just don't get the logic in general. He WAS the best player doing...pretty much what he did now, just with a healthier team around him, but now he needs a great evolution and players around him to re-take that spot? Again, that's talking about which TEAM is better. Is Jokic actually better this year than he was last year when Murray and Porter Jr were out? The consensus seemed to be that he wasn't. But those two come back after playing just 9 games last year and NOW Jokic overtakes Giannis? No, the Nuggets have overtaken the Bucks and Jokic deserves his flowers. He's an incredible talent. Bill Walton if he'd have stayed healthy type talent. I'll give him that. I do agree the coaching staff needs to help Giannis and create an actual offensive gameplan while Horst needs to try and acquire young talent with limited resources. Beauchamp's development will be crucial...and he's certainly added a whole lot of mass to try and take that leap working out with Giannis in Greece. So we'll see how that goes.

Well, I don't agree it was closer to the J-Kidd version of Giannis than the MVP version. He was 3rd in the league in PER last year, but that's not even the issue. Making the declaration that at 28; I So 28, 3rd in MVP voting, 3rd in PER, 2nd in defensive rating, 3rd in defensive +/-, 5th in +/- overall, and his usage rate was 1st in the league at ~39% and at 28, the best version of him is "gone and ain't coming back," because he wasn't historically great last year? That seems like a wild declaration in my opinion. Even last year his TS% was equal to Tatum and we're writing him off now like he's some past his prime injury prone player? If ever there was a sign of how quickly we've taken for granted his greatness...

It absolutely does. It eliminates the MLE, it eliminates sign and trades, it eliminates the bi-annual, it eliminates a LOT of different trades, it eliminates signing players who were bought out. You trade a pick and that pick moves to the bottom of the round...so that future 1st the Bucks have that they could trade becomes far less valuable as a team that may look at it as a pick the Bucks may have without Giannis or during a rebuild loses that value. Getting below that 2nd line is really the only way they're going to be able to add anyone outside of a minimum salary veteran.

Yeah, that makes sense. He MAY have hit his peak. I don't see any reason he can't stay at his peak for a couple more years. Again, he's just 28. That was how old Jordan was when he won his 2nd Title. And his mid-range game is much better than I think he's given credit for. The problem was two fold. 1-They didn't actually run an offense. Ingles came back late and it was primarily just exchanging possessions in which someone would try and take their man off the bounce. 2-Middleton wasn't really all the way back until the end of the year. Had a lingering knee issue we just found out about. That forced Giannis to handle the ball and be the facilitator even more than before. And he STILL went for ~31/12/6. And this is a down year we're talking about. I think a new coach and some type of actual offensive ideology beyond penetrate and score or kick will help. I also don't think Giannis' athleticism is going anywhere in the near future. I also think we saw an injured Giannis in the playoffs and he'd lost his touch around the rim, which is an underrated aspect of his game. It's not just run and dunk, it's how he contorts himself and the ways in which he puts the ball in the hoop while splitting defenders. He still put up 38/20 in the last game and the Bucks blew two straight to the team currently in the ECF's with a 13 and a 15 point lead heading in the 4th quarters. There's not a lot of margin for error of course with a team this age, but there's still enough there to win another title with Giannis. https://fadeawayworld.net/nba-media/giannis-antetokounmpo-is-shooting-better-from-mid-range-than-jayson-tatum-lebron-james-and-zach-lavine

Well that makes sense. I think it's really just a matter of actually running a cohesive offense. I like what Jrue brings and I think we've got the pieces...IF they're healthy. I'm loving Beauchamp working with Giannis in Greece. I'm hoping Middleton can get back to the better version of himself. That he needed another surgery and STILL played as well as he did in the post-season is encouraging. He was around 24-25 PPG, shooting over 50/40. Ingles is old, but I think he can be a nice facilitator offensively. Terry Stotts is going to be great for this team...and I think Griffith can keep the defense elite. A HUGE part of the equation is going to be getting Middleton and Lopez back hopefully closer to ~33 and 17 than 40 and 20. Would keep us below the 2nd line that really handcuffs us. I think Jrue would bring back a nice return, but he's been pretty adamant about retiring after his contract is up. That could be in a year or more likely two. Not sure what that gets you.

I'm...just at a total loss for words. "Giannis is probably more ideal as a #2 all-around sorta player." He's been the consensus best player in the NBA the last 3 years and ONLY passed up because Jokic is having the type of post-season he had. Speaking of which, they're almost exactly the same age. So who are we adding so that Giannis is our #2? Man...do we get spoiled QUICK in Wisconsin. You've got a top ~15 player ALL-TIME in his prime and people are saying at...again, TWENTY-EIGHT years old, his prime is behind him and now that he's more ideal as a #2. Guess not a total lost for words, but just dumbstruck either way.

WHAT? Are you seriously inferring that the best of Giannis is "gone," at the ripe old age of 28? That's....wild.

Drafting based on need is not a particularly good idea in any sport, but at least in the NFL, you or NBA, you're talking about players who are more likely to contribute to their teams in the next year or two. In MLB, you're looking at ~3 years if you hit on a College prospect and 5 maybe 6 if it's a HS kid outside the rare stars in each. There's been a pretty stark change in their drafting ideology the last several years. Better hit tools, athleticism...just stick with that. As soon as you start trying to find your next 1B, you're going to reach and for what? Projecting the 2028 lineup?

No clue as this entire thing is absolutely ridiculous. Money to MAINTAIN the stadium? Sure...great. But this ridiculous threat or inferred threat that we'd better or else? I'm not sure what type of forum this is, but if I were to articulate my point how I wanted, I'm sure my post, which will be awaiting approval by a moderator-would not be approved. The stadium is outstanding, it's in great shape, the Brewers are doing well. And again, I get we need to plan ahead, but unless this was some combined blackmail by Attanasio and MLB to get the state to actually pony up money that I think both sides are already pretty much in agreement that this is something that needs to be done, then I don't understand the point. And not that this is of huge significance, but it's also made it sound as though we're on similar footing to the As or Rays and we've just got a trash stadium.