Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

Hawks 102, Bucks 92: Atlanta's quick start dooms Bucks

Jennings carried the Bucks with 34 points

Box Score

Maybe the Bucks just needed to check their alarm clocks.

Twelve minutes into the Bucks' first postseason appearance in four years, the Bucks looked, well, like a team that hasn't been to the playoffs since 2006.  And as long as we're looking for excuses, maybe the 5:30 Eastern start time was also playing tricks on the Bucks.  

Atlanta came out looking bigger, quicker, and flat-out better, blitzing the flat-footed Bucks 34-17 in the first en route to a 22-point halftime lead that the Bucks couldn't overcome.  Behind a fearless 34-point effort from Brandon Jennings, the Bucks gave the Hawks a run the second half and at least salvaged their dignity going into game two, but they also got clear confirmation of what their up against: a damn good Hawks team. 

Admittedly, it wasn't an immediate beatdown--the teams split the first 12 points of the game. But Atlanta then went on a 26-6 run that featured a whole lot of Josh Smith and Al Horford dunking, blocking and generally dominating the Bucks' frontline.  We knew this could happen, but I guess I didn't expect it to happen so quickly.  The pair combined for a modest 27 overall, but they set the tone early with 16 of the Hawks' 34 in the opening period.    

Meanwhile, Jennings was the only Buck showing any intention of fighting back, drilling a three to close out the first and then ripping off another 13 points in the second, including the last nine of the half.  Unfortunately he had little help. While Atlanta continued to bully the Bucks inside and drill every open look they got (I'm looking at you, Mike Bibby), Jennings scored half the Bucks' 40 first half points, many of them on step-back jumpers and contested threes.  

But he also looked determined to test the Hawks' switching defense more than when the teams last met in Milwaukee, flipping in a couple floaters as well as a short glasser near halftime.  Smith and Horford each packed a couple of his efforts into the stands as well, showing that the Hawks weren't going to give up anything easily, but at least Jennings was giving them something to think about. Atlanta also had the Bucks chasing shadows on the other end, dropping 62 in the half on 62% shooting that featured four Hawks in double figures.      

Star-divide

The Bucks finally began to make some progress in the third, as Salmons shrugged off an anonymous first half to get his mid-range game going with 12 points, matching another dozen from Jennings as the Bucks outscored Atlanta 30-19 in the period.  The Hawks' energy level seemed to sag a bit after their huge first half, but the Bucks couldn't get over the hump in the fourth despite twice cutting the Hawks' lead to just seven.  Luke Ridnour gave Jennings four minutes of rest to start the period, but the rookie seemed to lose his touch on the bench and made just 1/5 to close the game, his lone bucket coming on a driving layup with 74 seconds left.  

But even that was better than Salmons, who went scoreless in the final period.  The upside was that the other Bucks finally did something: Mbah a Moute's activity translated into six points and Ridnour and Ilyasova each added five points.   In the end, Crawford, Bibby and Johnson made enough jumpers to close it out, but Atlanta was at least offered a reminder of the Bucks' fighting spirit.  

Three Bucks

Brandon Jennings: 40 min, 34 pts, 14/25 fg, 4/6 threes, 2/4 ft, 3 reb, 3 ast, 1 stl, 3 to
Jennings spoke before the game about needing to keep his emotions in check, but let's hope he doesn't lose any of his swagger or edginess in the process.  While the rest of the Bucks seemed unprepared for the increased intensity level of the playoffs, the rookie again rose to the occasion and carried the Bucks on his young, narrow shoulders for three full quarters.  His 34 points were also the fourth-best playoff debut in NBA history, just shy of the 36 points Derrick Rose dropped against the Celtics last year.  Perhaps the most encouraging thing was how he was doing it.  Yes, he had his slingshot jumper going from all over the court, but he also showed no fear in attacking the Hawks' shot-blockers and coming away with 10/19 shooting from two in addition to 4/6 from deep. While the Hawks blocked five of his shots, the Bucks really can't afford for him to be any less aggressive than he was tonight.   

John Salmons: 43 min, 16 pts, 6/18 fg, 0/5 threes, 4/4 ft, 5 reb, 2 ast, 6 stl, 2 to
Salmons never got his longball working and generally had a long night coping with the Hawks' aggressive, shot-blocking defense.  He finally got things going in the third quarter to get the Bucks back in the game, but a scoreless fourth quarter (on just two shots) left plenty to be desired.   

Luc Mbah a Moute: 31 min, 8 pts, 4/5 fg, 0/1 ft, 6 reb, 1 stl, 0 to
For better or worse, Skiles seemed determined to get Mbah a Moute his minutes, starting him against Johnson and leaving Delfino to cope with the bigger Smith.  It's tough to argue it was a good strategy in the first, but the Bucks' starters looked a lot better in the third and overall Mbah a Moute helped limit Johnson to 22 points on 21 shots.   

Three Numbers

11-1. The block stats underscore Atlanta's physical dominance rather glaringly.  Horford (5 blk) and Smith (4 blk) move exceptionally well on the perimeter and give the Hawks a ton of flexibility--not only do they erase teammates' defensive mistakes, but they also allow the Hawks to switch all over the place.  The fact that none of the Bucks' frontcourt players are capable of taking advantage of a mismatched smaller player is also a big issue (Ersan, I'm looking at you).

80.  All five Hawk starters scored at least 12 points, four of them hitting double-digits by halftime, and Crawford added his customary 17 off the bench.  While they didn't get much else from their bench, 80 points from the starting five meant they didn't have to.

0.  The Bucks had zero assists in the first quarter, which summed up the first 12 minues pretty well.  Jennings largely seemed to be going it alone, the Hawks were closing out well when the Bucks moved the ball, and the Bucks seemed incapable of making a shot for most of the period. 

Three Good

Brandon Jennings. We all expected Jennings to be the series x-factor for the Bucks, and he didn't disappoint.  The problem was the lack of support--aside from Salmons' third quarter, the other Bucks just seemed content to sit back and watch Jennings put on his show.   

Taking it to the rack.  Since Bogut's injury I've been droning on a lot about the Bucks' problems scoring in the paint--six straight games with 28 or fewer points, blah blah blah.  So it was at least somewhat encouraging to see the Bucks keep it fairly close in that category for a change, swallowing their pride and going at the Hawks' shot-blockers.  As much as the Hawks seemed to be dominating inside much of the night (+10 blocks, +5 rebounding), they won the points in the paint category by just a four point margin (46-42).   

Fighting Back. The Bucks just aren't the kind of team that lays down and lets another club beat them up for four quarters, so you kind of knew they'd make the Hawks sweat a bit in the second half. And while moral victories aren't too valuable in a seven game series, it was at least encouraging to see the Bucks appear to figure some things out in the second half.  Hopefully some of that learning and confidence carries over to game two.   

Three Bad

Defenseless.  For all their early shooting struggles, the Bucks' offensive efficiency ended up at a rather healthy 106.2 pts/100 possessions, slightly above their season average.  But the Hawks averaged over 117 pts/100 possessions on 53% shooting, nearly matching the 118 pts/100 they put up in Milwaukee last Monday.  The defensive problems are becoming part of a worrying pattern of late: in the past week, the Bucks' defensive efficiency has been worse than 113 pts/100 in four straight games against Atlanta and Boston.

Swingmen.  Salmons and Delfino basically had one good quarter (Salmons' 12 point third) out of a combined eight. Delfino was essentially invisible with four points on four shots, his lowest point total since mid-January (excluding the Miami game where he suffered that ugly neck injury).  And while Salmons managed to scrape together a semi-respectable line, the Bucks will probably need a much bigger night from him to take game two. Overall, the Bucks would have been much better off had Skiles gone with a Luc/Ersan combo at the forward spots from the start, but that's the great thing about hindsight I suppose.  I'd expect Delfino to bounce back in game two, but the fact that Mbah a Moute has the best chance of stopping Johnson and Ilyasova is probably a better matchup for Smith could make it harder for Skiles to rationalize Delfino's usual 35-40 minutes. 

Ready...or not.  We probably should have known we were in trouble when we saw this game was going to be on ESPN.  While Atlanta fed off their crowd's energy, the Bucks seemed to be playing scared early and needed a full half before they had gotten their bearings.  

Comment 13 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I was going to say "Well Bibby wont shoot like that again"...

… but then I realized that its probably true for Jennings as well =(

Pls Pls Pls shoot at least 45% for the series BJ.

(Also Salmons needs to pick it up or pack it up asap!)

- In Jennings we trust

by ap3604 on Apr 18, 2010 3:58 AM CDT reply actions  

nice work BJ

credit to Jennings, was really the only one to attempt to get into the lane, put up his floaters and running shots, and they fell pretty well and even when they didnt and he was targeted by Smith/Horford he kept on attacking………..really impressed that he had the confidence and basketball IQ to keep going, would have been easy to follow the lead of the others and settle for long jumpers and his usual 3 point based offense

hopefully Salmons had his one bad game, shooting wise, but he is going to be targeted by the Hawks as the only other guy Jennings apart today, who can get his shot off

by ILIKEBJ'S on Apr 18, 2010 4:50 AM CDT reply actions  

was hoping

for a bit of veteran leadership production wise from Stack & KT but it is what it is at this stage of their career…………..now Gadz 6 statless minutes…..working towards a Primoz sighting

by ILIKEBJ'S on Apr 18, 2010 5:46 AM CDT reply actions  

46 wins

A good season.

This game? The hope that folks draw out of the second half may be half what it appears. To actually challenge TO WIN we would have had to play perfectly. And we’re not near perfect. Atlanta (a team that might be more impressive as up-and-coming than they will be as arrived; I think I smell incipient complacency) was going to let us back in the game. To a degree. But we couldn’t stop them from making clutch shots, and we didn’t make them fear the deer. It was always their game.

My take remains: if we play optimum, we could win a game. But we haven’t shown an edge to exploit on offense. We haven’t matched our willingness to play defense with talent for doing so – not against a team with Hawk-level offense. Haven’t shown any ability to discomfort the Hawks with Attacking defense.

I like my team. But see them now as the Little Engine that Huffs & Puffs – and Can’t.

by unklchuk on Apr 18, 2010 8:43 AM CDT reply actions  

I'm surprised at the Milwaukee Bucks blogs for not talking about this...

Taken from Ball Don’t Lie:

Brandon Jennings(notes) made shots, too. At one point in the game – in the last third quarter no less – Jennings had 32 points, he had missed seven shots, but five of them were blocked. This means, short of Al Horford(notes) and Josh Smith(notes) slapping things back, Jennings was getting whatever he wanted in the second and third quarter, and connecting. And, curiously, Scott Skiles decided to sit Jennings with the Bucks only down seven (after spending most of the game with a deep double-figure deficit) and a few minutes left in the third quarter. As if he was some veteran in his early 30s, looking to conserve the legs.

Though Luke Ridnour(notes) hit a three and runner in Jennings’ absence, he played poor D despite good effort, and the Hawks pulled away again. By the time Jennings returned with over four minutes gone in the fourth, the game was more or less finished, the momentum had swung back. And it didn’t help that before Jennings sat, the Bucks went away from him despite a hot hand. John Salmons(notes), Luc Mbah a Moute, and Carlos Delfino(notes) all got a (crummy) look, though Jennings didn’t help that case by being stripped by Joe Johnson(notes) on consecutive possessions following.

Is no one else in agreeance that Skiles made a critical error in taking Jennings out for such a long stretch? I realize that long stretch was actually about 5 clock minutes between the end of the third and beginning of the fourth, but Jennings was literally all we had offensively this game, and was blazing hot. If it weren’t for his cold return in the fourth, I think he would’ve missed only 1 or 2 shots that weren’t blocked. Yes, the rook needs time to breath too, but when no one else is producing, you have to keep those legs in. They’re young legs, and BJ has two days to sleep on them anyway. I would’ve preferred to see him taken out when he was….I think it was with about 30 seconds left in the third, and then plug him back in at the beginning of the fourth. Do we win the game if he’s in? I don’t think so. I think Atlanta would wake up after we tied it or came close. But I think we would’ve gotten a lot closer than seven if the hot hand was treated like the hot hand and stayed in the game.

by everyoneruns on Apr 18, 2010 9:42 AM CDT reply actions  

I think it is easy to question Skiles after the fact but if he left Jennings in and he clearly is fatigued and goes on to shoot 1-7 in that stretch then we rip on him for not giving him a rest for the stretch run...

Skiles and Jennings have a real close relationship, it seems from everything I’ve heard and read, and I would trust Skiles to keep Jennings in and pull him at the right times…

This is much ado about nothing…

by Superelkman on Apr 18, 2010 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions  

Sitting Jennings...

Could well have been a mistake to sit him so long.

I’d guess Skiles wanted J to regather himself after the two “rookie” turnovers and come back composed and ready to surprise the Hawks.

I don’t pretend to know if the bench time was too long. Yes, it was a bad result. Best the best strategy sometimes produces bad results.

Wonder if it’s possible that Skiles wanted another Buck to get hot while J sat. So J’s return could provide a double threat. (We won’t go far without a double threat.)

by unklchuk on Apr 18, 2010 10:30 AM CDT reply actions  

In hindsight

Bucks were down 7 when Jennings left with 36 seconds left in the third and 10 when he came back in with 8:22 left in the fourth, so I don’t see that as the Hawks really pulling away in four minutes of rest he got. And on the Bucks’ first possession after Jennings came back in, Ilyasova hit a three to make it 87-80 with 8 minutes left. How is the game “finished”? It makes for a convenient story to frame it as though the hawks destroyed the Bucks once Jennings sat down, but it’s really not true.

Knowing what we know now, sure, keep Jennings in there and see what else he can do. Having a couple days rest ahead is also a good point. But Jennings had been going full throttle on both ends for an entire quarter, so I also don’t think it was crazy to try to steal him a couple minutes rest. As unklchuk mentioned, he had a couple turnovers where he was trying to do too much late in the third, so Skiles might have been trying to calm him down a bit as well.

by Frank Madden on Apr 18, 2010 12:34 PM CDT reply actions  

And don't forget about Salmons

Salmons scored 12 in the third (just like Jennings) but didn’t get a rest at the end of the third/beginning of the fourth—he played the entire second half. And yet he also disappeared in the fourth, going scoreless on just two shots. So clearly Skiles should have rested Salmons and kept Jennings in, but I think that’s a lot easier to say now than during the game.

by Frank Madden on Apr 18, 2010 12:40 PM CDT reply actions  

More lack of talent than lack of rest?

When we cut it to 7 the Hawks probably figured they needed to work a little harder to keep us down. They did that easily, making key shot after key shot, but could likely have come up with more intensity should it have been needed. Our comeback got their attention but didn’t bother them or really challenge them. They just had a little business to take care of, and they did.

I personally don’t think coaching decisions accounted for this loss. We didn’t play playoff basketball in the first half. After that, Atlanta wins this game 11 times out of every 12.

by unklchuk on Apr 18, 2010 2:11 PM CDT reply actions  

one thing...........

Id prefer Salmons v Joe Johnson head to head, switching Prince straight away to Johnson allows Josh Smith to have his way with Delfino, Johnson will get his point regardless, and whilst Prince made him work, Johnson had little effect scoreboard wise in the first quarter and we were down by 17 anyway…………let Salmons go with him and in a way it forces Salmons into a groove as well as the go against each other?

yes hindsight and everything you would have like Jennings to be out there in the 4th at the start, just that he had the confidence in his shot and was in a nice groove, but heck who knows what happens, but in the night well when your down and Jennings was our one offensive weapon working on the night…………

agree we gotta crash the boards at all costs……..would have like to see Ilyasova a bit more in the 1t when it clearly wasnt going well and we were getting pounded by Smith/Horford inside

but all said and done that was a horrid start and you figure we wont play any worse than that and the Hawks wont get it that easy and shoot so well…..yes thats you Mike Bibby……bring on game 2

by ILIKEBJ'S on Apr 18, 2010 3:30 PM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Milwaukee Bucks.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Kksp2_small
The Schedule from Hell...
Dsc_0031_small
And Livingston Is What?
Kksp2_small
Settling on the Bucks' Nicknames.
Ellingtonspiller_small
Possible Bucks Trades
Dsc_0031_small
I overslept
Flag-of-canada_small
The Unofficial Andrew Bogut Trade Site
Small
Joel Przybilla Update
Kksp2_small
How Russel Crowe renewed my faith in Andew Bogut
Insider_g_mbrooks_480_small
Still crying over Marshon Brooks and its only going to get worse...
Small
Andrew Bogut a chance to play against the Kings

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Frank_small Frank Madden

Brewhoop_small Alex Boeder

Editors

Milwaukee_bucks_modern_logo_small Dan Sinclair

Bruv__316x634___316x634___316x634__small Steve von Horn

Authors

Rubberducky_small Mitchell Maurer

Front_small Jacob Grinyer