Recap: Bucks 65, Mavs 59
No one ever claimed summer league was pretty, did they? Despite fielding six probable roster players against a pretty thin Mavs team, the Bucks' subpar shooting (36%) and general sloppiness kept the score down and the game close throughout. The Mavs somehow managed to turn it over 27 times in 40 minutes while the Bucks managed 22 of their own, and neither team managed more than 16 points in a quarter until the final period when the Bucks outscored Dallas 21-20. Anyway, what you're really interested in are the player reviews, so let's cut to the chase after the jump.
Brandon Jennings
25 min, 3/12 fg, 3/4 ft, 10 pts, 3 reb, 3 ast, 3 pf, 2 to, 2 stl
Jennings' matchup against fellow speedster Rodrigue Beaubois pretty much fell flat, as neither guy ever looked to get into a comfort zone. Beaubois seemed to neutralize Jennings' quickness for much of the night, but despite a better shooting line (4/9 fg) he also racked up eight fouls and six turnovers in 22 minutes. In contrast, Jennings actually looked pretty conservative, turning it over just twice and not showing much of the flash he's been hyped to have. That's probably fine with Scott Skiles, who sat by himself on the opposite side of the gym from John Hammond, Billy McKinney and Jeff Weltman. Beaubois played pretty aggressive defense and had a couple athletic finishes around the rim, including a two-handed alley-oop where he lost Jennings on the backdoor.
Jennings struggled with his shot for most of the night, starting 0-7 before draining a three from the right wing with two minutes to go in the third. He followed it up with a quick yank and pull-up jumper from the top of the key and also dropped in a tough, scissor-kicking floater from the lane early in the fourth. Overall he had a hard time getting to the hoop and he doesn't look like he's strong enough to be much of a finisher--at least not now. He did have his share of nice passes on the night but thanks to the Bucks' cold shooting he finished with just two assists. At least he can feel a bit better about the second half, when he was 3/5 from the field and scored all 10 of his points.
Joe Alexander
30 min, 4/18 fg, 6/7 ft, 14 pts, 7 rebs, 1 ast, 4 pf, 2 to, 1 blk
Well, you can't accuse the guy of not being aggressive. Joe's shot wasn't falling despite creating some pretty good looks, but that's kind of been the story for him, hasn't it? It didn't seem to bother him as he continued to work hard on both ends, operating mostly from the high post against rookie PF Ahmad Nivins, who had a very fine, active game with 19 points on 8/10 fg. The Bucks worked out Nivins before the draft but passed on him in the second round as he dropped to 56th overall. He had a couple nice putback dunks when no one boxed him out, in addition to showing a feathery touch from the mid-range. I like him a lot.
Kelvin Sampson mentioned this week that they would try to get Alexander more isos and that certainly happened, as he had a series of faceup isolation plays run for him, most notably in the first half. We saw his excellent first step on numerous occasions last year and that was also apparent playing against bigger, slower defenders like Nivins. He almost had a tremendous drive and dunk on the baseline in the first half, but he lost his grip on the ball as he was about to finish. Despite grabbing a game-high seven rebounds he still doesn't seem to ever box out, instead relying exclusively on hustle and athleticism.
Amir Johnson
21 min, 2/5 fg, 4 pts, 4 rebs, 7 pf, 7 to, 2 blk, 2 stl
No one's arguing that Amir played well, but I was still kind of shocked to see he had 7 turnovers--it seemed like he barely touched the ball. Looking at the box score play-by-play, three of those were on loose ball fouls following Bucks' misses, which I didn't even think counted as turnovers since neither team theoretically has possession off a missed shot. Whatever.
He also continued to foul like it's going out of style, but it's important to put that in the proper context. It's not like he was getting worked in the post; he got the aforementioned three fouls on loose balls and had another couple defending the rim after somebody else lost their man. I can live with that, especially given the way he came out of nowhere to block a couple shots.
I'm not sure whether it's something he'd look for in a regular season game, but he also was 1/3 on long two-pointers. C'mon Amir, let's not go all Gadzuric on us.
Jodie Meeks
27 min, 6/9 fg, 1/1 3fg, 1/2 ft, 2 rebs, 2 pf
Hey, somebody actually played well! Meeks was exactly as advertised, shooting mostly from mid-range and looking as comfortable as you'd expect from a guy who averaged 24 ppg in the SEC. Unlike Jennings, Meeks always keeps excellent balance as he shoots, which helps explain how consistent his stroke is. Pretty much all his points were off catch-and-shoot plays, and I don't remember him even trying to drive to the rim.
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute
30 min, 2/5 fg, 2/4 ft, 6 pts, 5 rebs, 2 ast, 4 pf, 1 stl, 3 to, 1 blk
I wasn't focusing on Luc as much as the other roster guys, and he didn't do that much out of the ordinary. He played SF against Luke Jackson much of the night, and showed his usual good footwork defending the perimeter. Offensively, he had a couple finishes around the rim but didn't show off any newfound range or anything else we didn't already know.
Salim Stoudamire
13 min, 2/4 fg, 0/1 3fg, 2/2 ft, 6 pts, 1 reb, 1 ast, 5 pf, 1 to, 1 blk
Stoudamire hasn't played competitive basketball in about a year, so this week is really just a chance for him to get used to the pace of almost-NBA-action. He played sparingly alongside former UAB PG Paul Delaney, though Stoudamire seemed to handle a bit more of the PG duties and neither guy did anything to distinguish himself.
0 recs |
12 comments
|
Comments
Recap
Thanks for the re-cap as I couldn’t watch the game. Hopefully the shooting improves in the next game. JA continues to disappoint. Hopefully it finally starts to click soon as he can’t impact the summer league, he is going to have little influence in the regular season.
Cheers from Australia,
Ty
Johnson
His performance was about what I expected from him given his history of playing poorly when first coming back from a long layoff. He hadn’t played competitively since April
He also looked like he was out of game shape and for the most part disinterested. I have watched him play long enough to tell when he is just going through the motions and playing really hard. It wasn’t until the 4th quarter that he stepped it up a little.
He will always foul at a high rate and commit a relatively high rate of turnovers. He needs to keep working on his outside shot. If he can hit it consistently then the guy defending him will have to come out and guard him. This will allow Johnson to drive to the basket more.
Near the end of the game with less than 30 seconds remaining one of the Mavs played was removed because he was bleeding profusely from his face. It looked like it was his nose. Johnson coincidently? was removed at the same time with less than 30 seconds left and did not return.
I didn’t see how the Mavs player incurred the facial injury and the announcers did not comment on how it happened. Howeve, Johnson is a tough kid and has been known to play dirty. Anyone know exactly what happened on that play?
It was actually a stray elbow from Jennings. Luke Jackson was trying to foul BJ as he was in the backcourt in the final 10 seconds and Jackson kind of swiped low as Jennings flew by. Jennings’ off arm looked like it went up as he went by and caught Jackson in the nose, but it didn’t look like there was any intent.
by Frank Madden on Jul 11, 2009 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Stray Elbow
Thanks for the update.
My question is.
Why did Sampson take Johnson out with so little time remaining, as I recall about 10 seconds? It just seems strange that you would pull a guy who might become your starter in the fall with just about 10 seconds left in a summer league game, unless he got injured.
I think it was just tactical
The Bucks were up five when Sampson replaced him with Delaney (a PG), presumably because to have more perimeter defenders on the court with the Mavericks needing three pointers. I don’t think there was anything to it beyond that.
by Frank Madden on Jul 11, 2009 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Jennings and Meeks
I thought Meeks looked good. I saw Meeks play a number of times last year because I am a Patrick Patterson fan. It seems to me that Meeks
1. Can really stroke it
2. Can look really bad on offense when he forces it unless he is in one of his shooter’s zones. Then it doesn’t matter what he throws up, most likely it will go in. When he is not in the zone If he lets the game come to him and takes only good shots he also does very well. When he looks bad like everyone else except Kobe, is when he continues to shoot forcing up bad shots and while he is not in a zone. Kobe never looks bad. LOL
Jennings played a lot better in the 2nd half. I thought all things considered he played a decent overall game. I thought he played hard.
As he gets more minutes and experience his confidence will improve and I believe his game along with it.
I thought it was a good start for a 19 year old kid playing PG in his first game at this level.
He was much more in control than I had expected. He forced a couple jumpers and gambled on defense at times, but nothing disastrous.
by Frank Madden on Jul 11, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Jodie Meeks
I think the Bucks’ fans are really going to enjoy Jodie Meeks. I’m a 50-year ‘Cat fan and can honestly say that Jodie has provided us with some of the best memories of the past 20 years. A great kid that is strong, quick and has an unstoppable motor. He’s usually very efficient in his shot selection and over-all offensive game. The times you may have seen Jodie forcing bad shots were probably in those games where Patterson was triple-teamed and no one else on the team would take a shot. Jodie, many times, was forced to put the team on his shoulders (offensively) and carry it the whole game.
In my opinion, Milwaukee got a steal…no ifs, ands or buts.
Great to hear
Thanks for that, MTCAT.
I think I heard someone mention Allan Houston the other day as a possible best-case scenario, which seems to make some sense (also ironic given Meeks’ 54-point game came against Houston’s alma mater). Obviously I’m not expecting him to become an 18-20 ppg guy, but there’s certainly precedent for a guy with his type of game being very valuable. As long as he can be a decent defender he should be a guy who plays a long time in the league.
Given Redd and Bell’s issues staying healthy he’ll probably be asked to play decent minutes at some point this season—and the fact they gave him a three year deal shows how optimistic they are about his abilities.
by Frank Madden on Jul 11, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions
What Is the Deal With National Coverage?
I do not understand the national media’s response to the Bucks’ summer. A good example of how folks outside of Wisconsin view the Jefferson trade and loss of Villanueva is Yahoo’s team report for the Bucks:
"NBA officials are still baffled as to why Bucks general manager John Hammond didn’t even extend a qualifying offer to veteran F Charlie Villanueva. Villanueva was coming off a quality season and he’s still only 24 years old. What’s more, the Bucks have a dearth of reliable power forwards on their roster. Villanueva ended up signing a contract with the Detroit Pistons.
Bucks owner Herb Kohl has a reputation of sometimes meddling in the team’s player personnel decisions. Some observers felt Kohl may have been behind the Bucks’ recent decision to trade veteran small forward Richard Jefferson to San Antonio for virtually nothing (Bruce Bowen, Kurt Thomas and Fabricio Oberto, the last of whom was then traded to Detroit for Amir Johnson). But Bucks general manager John Hammond said Kohl didn’t mandate any salary dump and that it was strictly his call to make the trade and open up more "options" for the team."
To those that have actually been following the Bucks, these moves aren’t “baffling”, they are shrewd basketball decisions based on the Bucks’ untenable position as a lottery team that is near the luxury tax threshold. Many at BrewHoop even suggested similar moves as the best we could hope for. These are the steps towards building a better team, and yet we get no respect at all.
Also, I don’t get why it is that players are suddenly seen as better as soon as they leave Milwaukee. Mo left and became an All Star after putting up similar numbers on a better team. Jefferson leaves and suddenly he’s not a one dimensional player whose injuries and regression made him prematurely over-the-hill, he’s a versatile defender and offensive dynamo who makes the Spurs “younger” and a “contender”. Now Joe Dumars is being hailed by some as a genius for signing Charlie. I guarantee you that if the Bucks had matched, they would be lambasted for overpaying a defensive seive. The double standard, that implies that not currently successful small market teams inherently suck, is really starting to get to me.
Agreed.
The Yahoo thing was a bit weird to me because usually their team report is pretty good. For one I’ve always heard that Kohl was the one who liked CV, and that it was the basketball people who didn’t. Sure, Kohl doesn’t want to pay the tax but 95% of owners are the same way.
by Frank Madden on Jul 12, 2009 1:05 AM CDT up reply actions

by 





















