The newest Brew Hooper answers your queries!
Welcome back to the latest installment of our Questions and Antlers Milwaukee Bucks mailbag series! Taking the baton for his first appearance as an antlerer answerer is our newest writer, Jack Trehearne. Take it away, Jack…
Before I start, I would just like to say that this community is unlike any I’ve seen. There really is no equivalent here in Australia. The depth of knowledge you guys have about the team is so far-reaching, and these questions really fired up my Bucks brain. So, hats off to you all for sending these in. I hope I answered them with the same grace with which they were asked. Finally, these questions were all answered a few weeks ago, so the stats/info cited might not be accurate up to the publishing date.
Mitchell Maurer asks: Always enjoy these, thanks for stepping up to the plate Jack! I’ve got two for you: 1. It’s been said by many and more that the Bucks desperately need some of their current young guys to hit, in order for the team to maintain an open contention window for as long as possible. Barring another unforeseen, Damian Lillard-level trade, there doesn’t appear to be any other way for Milwaukee to add youthful talent besides the home-grown route. A.J. Green (20.1 mpg) and Andre Jackson Jr. (18.6 mpg) rank 7th and 8th (respectively) on the Bucks in total minutes played, and seem to have firmly established themselves as steady members of the rotation. Assuming that Khris Middleton returns to the lineup someday, and with good fortune on the injury front, the Bucks should have enough depth for the foreseeable future. My question for you is this: is this enough internal development for the team to remain relevant beyond this season?
My first thought is that when you have Giannis, you are always “relevant” to some degree. But your point is well taken. They are cutting it fine, trying to rely on Green and Jackson to keep the youth movement flowing as the older stars slowly (we hope) age out. Luckily, despite his largely unimpressive drafting record, Jon Horst continues to hit on minimum contracts. Typically, minimums aren’t meant to be major parts of teams, but Milwaukee has needed them to be—and they have been! Say what you will about Malik Beasley, but he filled a void last year. This year, another two hits with Prince and Trent, at least.
So, the lack of youth development has been somewhat neutered by effective minimum signings. But as we know, guys on minimums want to prove they are better than that and run for more money. Thus, it’s not sustainable to keep relying on them. Youth development is paramount for the team to remain relevant, and to answer your question: Green and Jackson’s development probably isn’t enough, in my opinion.
What do they do? Well, without many draft picks to play with, I think Horst and the front office must hit around the edges by identifying fringe talent that hasn’t worked in other stops but could work in Milwaukee. For example, a three-and-D wing or stretch big who struggles to do anything off the bounce may not need to have that skill—because Giannis creates those opportunities—and the Bucks can benefit just from that player’s shooting ability.
Or they simply identify talent that nobody else saw; there doesn’t have to be some glaring weakness. For example, Memphis does this routinely (Scotty Pippen Jr., Jay Huff). The Grizzlies also routinely hit on later draft picks as well (Desmond Bane, Brandon Clarke, GG Jackson II, Vince Williams Jr., Jaylen Wells). To the Milwaukee front office’s credit, they seem to have unearthed a handy two-way guard in Ryan Rollins. As some know, I think Stanley Umude’s skillset—or what I understand it to be, at least—could be helpful for this team, but he hasn’t got a chance yet to confirm or deny those priors. Wisconsin’s own Henry Ellenson, who the Bucks signed to an Exhibit 10 contract, has been showing some enticing stuff for the Herd of late. Is he an option they look at? AJ Johnson and Tyler Smith are both unknowns at this point, being so young. But overall, my message would be to invest heavily in scouting and hit around the edges.
2. From your playing days, what was your favorite drill in practice? What was your least-favorite?
My favourite drill, for some reason, was the “corridor drill.” The ball-handler had to dribble up one side of the court with a defender trying to turn them multiple times, and then once the ball crossed half-court, it turned into live one-on-one. My least-favourite drill would be the defensive shell drill: five-on-zero defence to work on defensive principles… that was pretty boring.
Pricesters aka PJ asks: First 9 games: Pretty bad! Last 10 games: Pretty good! What’s the biggest change that happened to turn things around?
Part of this was simply the players starting to make shots they ordinarily make. But my best answer to this is that the players seem to have found real comfort in their respective roles from game to game. As an example, Andre will competently handle the other team’s best perimeter player defensively, allowing everyone else some rope to know that they just need to do their jobs. His ability to do that then makes Brook Lopez’s job easier, mimicking the way Lopez used to work in tandem with Jrue Holiday, funneling the ball into the paint. So, number one is the defence is performing much better now.
On offence, Giannis and Dame seem to have found trust and a chemistry they were not initially playing with. Giannis’ willingness to play through Dame to generate scoring opportunities for himself and his teammates has been great to watch! Khris is now working himself into the offence, looking more like himself with each passing game. Green and Trent come in and know their roles (for the most part): play solid defence, work off some dribble hand-offs and pick-and-rolls, and spot up from three. And lastly, hate to say it, but the exclusion of Pat Connaughton from the rotation has clarified some stuff. But for the most part, this rotation of eight to nine guys has found a rhythm that will only be enhanced with Khris Middleton now back.
Tao of Hoop asks: Hi Jack, who do you think should go to the bench when Khris returns? AJax’s contribution is very curious to examine. One on hand his basic +/- is generally very favorable and the eye test bears this out. BUT his offensive BPM is very poor and defensively is just average, right there with TP, Khris and AJ Green (who advanced stats love). Are those latter two solid enough defensively to start together? Or will TP or AJax persevere in the lineup?
Honestly, I just looked up what BPM was—thus, I would defer to your knowledge on that. Look, I believe AJax should be the fifth starter, which would mean Prince goes to the bench. However, AJ Green is starting to make this a really interesting debate, as his defence has been great and he is often what gets the team going after a slow offensive start. But I’ll stick with AJax for a few reasons.
Firstly, in between four very capable offensive players, Andre’s fit as a guy that does not need to touch the ball (and can use all his energy on defence) is not necessarily a bad thing. Now, opposing teams know this and will try to make him shoot the ball, but Brook Lopez’s ability to stretch the floor should provide them enough leash to deploy Jackson in the dunker spot and survive for the time being. To his credit, Jackson has looked at least somewhat capable of hitting the occasional perimeter shot, though, sitting at 37% on nearly two attempts per game this season. In the long term, yes, he’ll need to become a more reliable and frequent shooter. Also, passing was a strength of Jackson’s in college. This skill can be utilised by deploying him as a de facto playmaking centre (with Brook or Bobby spaced), which is fully optimised by pairing him with the team’s offensive engines. If anyone wanted to see what it looks like when he doesn’t have offensive engines to work off, I would refer them to his summer league and preseason film…
Secondly, Jackson is just a very talented defender, and I don’t believe there is anyone else who can do what he does on the roster. Trent, Green, and Wright are much better than the options last year—and that depth matters, to be sure—but the reality is that those guys are probably a little too small to fill this role adequately. Jackson can guard up and down the positional spectrum in a truly unique way that Taurean Prince, for example, cannot (no offence, TP). You can chuck him on both Jayson Tatum and Trae Young and get away with it. As I wrote in answering another question, his ability to stay connected to offensive players has flow-on effects on guys like Brook and Giannis. Thus, putting Andre out there to set the tone from the jump and not allow opposing guards to start feeling good about themselves is more advantageous than bringing him off the bench, in my opinion.
Having said this, Doc has been quick—occasionally too quick, some would contend—to diagnose if he thinks it’s just not going to be a Jackson game. He may start and play just ten minutes. So, I’m not overly concerned with who starts the game; it’s who finishes that is important. I just think surrounding Andre with talented offensive players enhances his game the most, and to do that, he should be the fifth starter. Put him out there to start, get a feel for the game, and make decisions from there. Part of me also thinks it’s valuable for both Andre and his teammates to have him playing with similar lineups each night. He is the polar opposite of a plug-and-play guy, and so the main players need to have reps with him on offence to nail down what plays to run with him, where he should be spaced, etc.
Tao of Hoop also asks: I’ve read an interesting trade proposal of Larry Nance currently languishing in Atlanta for BP—the money works and actually saves some money. I’ve always been impressed with Nance’s floor game and hustle and he’s now improved as a shooter. It would hurt to lose BP’s instant offense and rebounding, but his advanced stats are very poor this year and the eye test suggests a liability on both ends. I like how Nance plays his best at big games too. On the downside, he’s slightly shorter and older.
Yeah, this is a very interesting trade proposal. Let’s talk about Nance. He has been mostly healthy for the past two seasons when he was with the Pelicans, playing 65 and 61 games. The seasons before that, he played nine, 37, 46, and 35. So, his past with injuries is somewhat concerning. You’d ideally want to have a capable third centre if he came into the fold to be prepared for an injury. However, although Nance’s assist numbers are actually not too dissimilar from BP’s, I understand him to be pretty handy in the short roll as a playmaker (he’s also previously played with Dame, which is helpful). He seems to be a capable defender who rebounds and defends—a major athlete in his prime. Plus, you don’t need to feature him offensively. The plus/minus splits in recent years are also much better than Bobby’s.
BP, I genuinely appreciate how you’ve embraced the city, but I am doing this trade without much hesitation at all. If anything, Nance is on an expiring contract, and you can go in another direction if it doesn’t work. Truthfully, I think extending Bobby would be a mistake.
Check back this weekend to see if Jack answered your question in part two.