Fixing The Milwaukee Bucks Offense
When I say "Milwaukee Bucks", people can think of several things. The optimists think of the top-10 defense under Scott Skiles, the historians think of Lew Alcindor, Oscar Robinson, and Sidney Moncrief, and the dreamers think of Brandon Jennings transforming into the little point guard who could (shoot over 50% from the floor).
But something we can all agree on is that this offense is bad. Wait, let me reemphasize that: the offense is BAD.
REALLY BAD. THE TYPE OF MOTHER-SHUT-YOUR-MOUTH THAT SHAFT IS: A BAD ONE.
Do you not see the point I'm making? No? Let's look at a chart!
| Season | Points/game | Rank | FG percent | Rank | Points/Shot | Rank |
| 2008-2009 | 99.3 | 15 | 44.5% | 27 | 1.21 | T-24 |
| 2009-2010 | 97.7 | T-22 | 43.6% | 29 | 1.14 | 30 |
| 2010-2011 | 91.9 | 30 | 43.0% | 30 | 1.15 | 30 |
| 2011-2012 | 92.3 | T-20 | 42.7% | 23 | 1.10 | T-26 |
I'll back off now, because these numbers are making me sad (I can't imagine what they're doing to Steve von Horn.) But it's clear to us that, if they ever want to be more than a plucky underdog, the Bucks need to put the round orange thing in the other round orange thing more often.
That glorious insight begs the question: How? How do you teach a team that has mastered the art of preventing scoring to only do so on one side of the court? The possible cures are everywhere: Ball movement! Faster pace! Let Jennings shoot more! Make Jennings shoot less! Trade Bogut! Trade Jackson! Trade EVERYONE! THREE TEAM TRADE THAT GETS US JAMAL CRAWFORD AND NICK YOUNG; SO MANY POINTS OMG.
And these answers might be true. But the question I'm asking is a bit different: how do you get this team to score more? The answer is less complicated than you think.
First off, let us all realize that last year's team was a monumentally awful offensive team, and the largest culprits (John Salmons and Corey Maggette) no longer play here. We also must recognize the turnover from last year to this year: new additions include Stephen Jackson, Mike Dunleavy, Shaun Livingston, Beno Udrih, Tobias Harris, Jon Leuer, and (from a practical standpoint) Drew Gooden. Each one of these players has a specific offensive skill (except maybe Harris) that is an improvement on the lot that took the floor last season, and a few of these players (Livingston, Harris, and Leuer) stand to improve long-term.
So, yes, we suck at offense, but not quite so hard. We all remember the triumph over San Antonio and the Annual Brandon Jennings F the Knicks Exhibition, so it's not like this team can't score. But doing so with some regularity seems to be an issue.
Part of the problem is shot distribution. Jennings is taking 17.3 shots per game, making a career-high 44.4%. Andrew Bogut is second with 12.0 per game, but is shooting a Jennings-esque 45.5%. Cap'n Jack is lord of the chuckers this year, putting up 11.8 shots per game while making 36.2% of them.
Our most effective shooters? They aren't featured in the offense. Shaun Livingston is making a tidy 54.8% of his attempts, but only taking 5.8 per game. Jon Leuer is second with 53.2%, but takes 5.1 shots per game, and Tobias Harris is third at 48.9% on 5.0 attempts per game.
What about our outside shooters? We have several who claim to be specialists, but few actually match the description. Ersan Ilyasova has (temporarily) fulfilled the promise Scott Skiles saw in him (39.1% on 3-pointers), and Jennings has turned himself around from last season as well (35.1% from deep). Carlos Delfino might not be lighting the nets on fire, but he's a respectable 34.8%. But the rest? Jackson (28.8%), Leuer (25.0%), Dunleavy (18.5%), and Udrih (15.4%) have been worse than awful.
So we've got bad shooters taking most of our shots, on a team when even our good shooters can't hit over 45%. That's a problem, but not the whole problem.
* * *
In my judgement (WARNING: LACK OF STATISTICAL EVIDENCE AHEAD), the offense is not playing to its strengths. My approach to basketball has always been to figure out what the members of the team are actually good at, then building the game plan around that. I haven't seen that out of our Milwaukee Bucks; I've seen a team whose identity is determined more by the coaching staff than the players on the floor. That's great with Skiles on defense, but you get what we've spent 700 words describing on the other side.
And Skiles' seat is at least lukewarm right now, which just happens to be consistent with his first two head coaching stints (fired in Year 3 in Phoenix, fired in Year 5 in Chicago). Not that I'm calling for Skiles' head, but he won't be successful coaching a team that can't improve on offense, especially when the owner wants to a) figure out a way to get a new arena, and b) replace himself.
That brings us to the current roster, put together by John Hammond. Hammond did a masterful job cleaning up past mistakes, and has at least done an adequate job cleaning up his own (again, both Salmons and Maggette's contracts were pawned off on other teams). He's also done a good job at bringing in players who are talented enough to build an offense around, even if that talent hasn't translated into production (yet). Time will tell if Hammond can put together a real winner or not, but that's a different conversation for a different day.
* * *
Right now, the offense is based on protecting the ball, running pick-and-rolls or pick-and-pops, and (usually) settling for spot-up jump shots. The rest of the league knows this, which shows in Milwaukee's offensive performance. It's conservative to a fault, and the Bucks don't have the athletes or creative scorers to make a change right now. As always, maybe next year.
But there is a way to at least improve this year's offense with this year's roster. Without further ado, here's my 3-step plan for success!
1) More burn for Shaun Livingston. Livingston is the bright spot in the 3-team trade from before the lockout. He's money from mid-range, and he has a post game that most forwards envy. He's currently fifth on the team in minutes per game (23.8), but fourth and third are players he should be taking time from (Delfino and Jackson, respectively). Delfino should be an 18-20 minute player, while Jackson's 32.0 minutes per game is indefensible at this point in time. Livingston needs to get 25 minutes a night (or as much as his knee can handle), and the team needs to be more aggressive in getting him looks in the high post.
A lineup featuring Jennings-Livingston-Delfino-Ilyasova-Bogut would give great options. Livingston with the ball at either elbow could pass to a shooter, drive and dish to a cutter, or simply launch his silky-smooth turnaround over the shorter defender. It's a look that the team should run at least two or three times in a row, using the P&R game to force the defense out of rhythm.
2) Fix the free throw disparity. I thought we would talk about pace here (Alex would agree with me), but the Bucks are doing pretty well in that department with a factor of 95.0 (tenth overall, NBA league average is 94.0). Something the Bucks are doing terribly is getting to the line and making their shots while there. The team's free throw rate differential is horrendous (-11.59, 30th in the league), partly because the Bucks' rate is the 4th lowest and their opponents' rate is 3rd highest.
Part of this issue is that they're fouling so much (22.1 fouls per game, 6th highest in the NBA). While that might feel like Larry Sanders' nightly output, Bogut (3.4 per game), Sanders (3.2), Jackson (3.1), Luc Richard Mbah a Moute (2.8), Delfino (2.3), Harris (2.2), Ilyasova (2.0), Leuer (1.9), and Udrih (1.8) are all at or above the league average.
The other part is that they're not getting to the rim (only 27.8% of Milwaukee attempts are at the rim, 23rd in the league). Brandon Jennings actually leads the team with 4.9 attempts per game (AND HE'S MAKING 63% OF THOSE SHOTS!!!!!), but only he, Bogut, and Harris are above the league average for attempts at the rim. Hacking less and driving more will help balance out the differential, and the team's 77.4% free throw rate (9th in the league) will help put a few more points on the board.
3) Run a smarter base set. To be fair, the litany of injuries that have befallen the team helped ruin any semblance of continuity, but the base half-court set needs to be fixed. This comment thread between myself, Dan, and Steve inspired me, and this article from Beckley Mason at HoopSpeak confirmed my inspiration: we have a trio of stretch PFs that are skilled shooters, but are we using them enough?
But let's start at the foundation: the 1-5 pick-and-roll with Jennings and Bogut. The recipe for success during Brandon's rookie year, it's a simple read-and-react offense that lets Jennings take the initiative to make something happen. Bogut is no slouch here either, strong enough to set a solid pick, but still mobile enough to roll to the basket and catch the entry pass.
Making that the cornerstone of the offense is a must, because it gives us options. With shooters like Delfino and Dunleavy outside, there will be enough space inside the arc to operate. But the real improvement will be seen when the ball is put in the hands of one of our stretch 4's: Leuer, Ilyasova, or Gooden. When the other team's power forward leaves his man to help elsewhere, one of these guys is going to be open, and they've proved able to hit those shots in the past. My money would be on Leuer to be the top option, since both Drew and Ersan lack the consistency or confidence to make defenses pay for cheating.
That's a small sampling of what I think could work. What does the rest of BrewHoop think?
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"But let's start at the foundation: the 1-5 pick-and-roll with Jennings and Bogut."
YES! That way Bogut can get to the rim and finish with his chest to the basket instead of his back. And I may have to check the %’s but I believe that dunks are a higher percentage shot than fade away baby hook shots. At least I think. Wait let me check the stats….carry the one….YUP dunks are way a higher percentage. Not to mention way more bad ass.
Bogut does have enough athleticism to finish off of a roll
And when he dunks, he screams in his sexy Australian voice.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 10:05 AM CST up reply actions
We really need more consistent inside scoring
Whether that be Bogut, leuer, Gooden, Harris or someone else, we can’t keep hoping BJ is going to have a good night because I will not happen. I’d also vote for more Livingston, the stats prove that he takes good shots and hits them on a consistent basis.
"He always plays like he's a pit bull that hasn't been fed in about a year and that you've got pork chops in your pockets and that's the basketball." Of course, he's Canadian
Inside scoring seems to come down to having the "knack"
For example, Zach Randolph and Al Jefferson have it. Jon Leuer has shown it a little bit. Players like LaMarcus Aldridge might not be as effective inside, but are such great shooters they more than make up for it.
Drew Gooden on the other hand…
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 10:04 AM CST up reply actions
In No Particular Order....With Limitations:
Yes, Your GM has played musical chairs with his personnel second to none. Yet, financial limitations suggests that rarely/if ever will those attending the roster here be anymore then low to mid level 3-7 M dollar men. The getting gets good at the 8-10M mark, and this club can not / will not pay for that type of player; choosing instead two or three lower scaled reps.
That in itself is not always a bad thing, yet, in the case of this present GM it seemingly is, contrary to the article’s premise. The turnstyle keeps spinning, and the quality of player stays relativly the same.
Then, there’s the logic in it all. If Dunleavy is coming off of two weeks of no ball at all (his own admission post game last night), then why…or why.. is he launching up three pointers when in fact, again by his own admission, ‘his legs aren’t under him yet". This was echoed by Jon Mc….“Gotta get his game legs before those shots go down”. Fine. Then why in the sam hill is he taking them? And, last nights game found him exclusively in a positiion to lead the offense with his shot? Go figure?
Therefore, I’ve witnessed over the last few seasons questionable personnel moves, and then when / if they become rosterized, often utilized in ways that make one go MMMmmm?
I’ll hang up and listen for my answer.
-——-
Two good points
Dunleavy is a coaching issue, plain and simple. Either he’s ready to go or he isn’t. Skiles and his staff have to make that call in practice and warm-ups. An imperfect science, to be sure, since nobody’s trying to put a body on you during shootaround.
Spending is an ownership issue, plainer and simpler. If Kohl told Hammond, “Go ahead, make sure we get the right guy,” Hammond would have no problem getting an offer through. But Kohl is a small-market NBA owner in a fiscally-conservative part of the country, which makes last year’s foray into free agency all the more confusing.
Milwaukee’s not the fanciest of cities, but it’s not a cesspool. Players would come here if they can either a) win, or b) get paid. The team-grown Michael Redd was the last guy to get paid, and that certainly didn’t work out well. Maybe Herb Kohl is gun-shy about offering superstar money? Or maybe he’s just broke; everyone else is.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
Your questions have been submitted
…to God. Only she or he can answer them.
As a lowly angel, I can offer up wan explanations like:
Skiles goes with vets (until he decides to hate them). That’s why Salmons last season went on and on and on with his individual efforts. That’s perhaps why Dunleavy is getting so many minutes. I wish Skiles felt differently.
Our cap situation has forced middling/mediocre players on us. Hammands seems to have fought that with quantity. I think our salary structure improves in a couple years. If the team is still in Milwaukee, we may (or may not) see more quality. Hammonds seems habituated to taking flyers on players with possible upside and probable downside. Like Maggette and Jackson and (in half measure) Gooden.
I’ll be back when I hear from The Boss.
I like how "Hammands" reminds me of "Ham Hands"
That can be John Hammond’s alter ego’s alter ego.
John Ham-Hands: the same terrible GM, now with 50% more meat!
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
But we already have the Hammond/Hammonds dichotomy...
Yet I still like this as a third personality. Maybe for every player he drafts with poor hands that could have easily been identified in draft scouting and avoided in the draft (Larry Sanders), he gets the Ham Hands tag.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 12:22 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
whew...
Couldn’t figure out why I smelled so bad. My hygiene has been above average lately. I’d be committing beautiful words to forum and this pungent odor would waft into my nostrils. It was distracting. Might have made me more critical.
My home office is the dinette part of the kitchen. I finally discovered half of a white onion in a plastic bag that had begun to mushify and sprout green zits. That was the source of the odor. So strong that a plastic bag couldn’t contain it.
It could be a sign… Have the Bucks begun to mushify and sprout green zits?
Flip Saunders is getting fired?
Will Skiles be next?
But why Saunders. did ownership expect 3 or 4 wins by now?
"He always plays like he's a pit bull that hasn't been fed in about a year and that you've got pork chops in your pockets and that's the basketball." Of course, he's Canadian
Flip didn't have much of a chance with that roster
by Frank Madden on Jan 24, 2012 1:03 PM CST up reply actions
The roster had similar chances with Flip.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 1:56 PM CST up reply actions
I really like this piece.
The only question I have (oh gosh, here come the hater comments again…) is how well people think Jennings did with Bogut in 1-5 pick and roll in his rookie year. Obviously his overall stats don’t really show anything other than terrible (on an individual and team level), but I do recall Bogut being dangerous in those looks pre-injury. Was it Ridnour running those sets? Some of both?
The thing Jennings has seen more of since his rookie year (and why they don’t run him constantly in PNR now) is that teams are going under the screen and daring him to shoot off the dribble OR showing very hard and Jennings doesn’t have the size to make anything but the safety valve pick-and-pop pass out of the strong show.
When he finds the corner he can be dynamic, but for all the times he doesn’t find the corner there isn’t much good he can do on a consistent basis.
Is this fair, or haterific like it’s all (not) terrific?
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 12:29 PM CST reply actions
Whether the hater comments come today or not
I keep thinking you need this shirt.
I never use a big word when a diminutive word would suffice.
by TheJay on Jan 24, 2012 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Yea, that's actually pretty sweet.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
It’s always seemed to me that teams defend Jennings p’n’r by blanketing either him or the roll man. When they both go with the roller, Jennings gets a wide-open 19-footer—hardly a dangerous shot from him so far in his career. When they blanket Jennings, he hasn’t been able to beat double-teams or make the great passes that the elite point guards can make to beat such defense. But he hasn’t gotten a lot of help from his screen-setters, either—Bogut is really the only guy who seems to attack the rim with any ferocity off a roll, and nearly every big on the Bucks’ roster has trouble handling anything other than perfect passes.
What I’ve noticed (or chosen to notice) this year is that teams seem to be “hedging their bets” when defending the P&R a bit more, and that’s where Jennings has improved. When the openings are there, he’s making the right pass and either setting up easy buckets or fouls. Two possible reasons I’ve come up with: 1) It’s a reaction to Jennings’ moderately improved shooting, although his long jumper isn’t really any better than it has been, or 2) There’s been better side-action from the rest of the players on the court as these P&Rs are taking place, giving Jennings more options. This is especially visible when more than one pass comes out of those P&Rs. Jennings dumps it to Jackson or Dunleavy in the corner, who makes a quick move and then makes one more pass to somebody coming off a screen for an open shot. Stuff like that doesn’t necessarily get associated with an improved 1-5 P&R, but it’s starting from a simple play.
Whew.
by Dan Sinclair on Jan 24, 2012 12:56 PM CST up reply actions
like skiles
Im happy that we have an actual coach and GM, they have gone a long way towards restoring the franchise to something respectable. skiles is solid, guys have to make plays. Hammond has made some errors but overall he has been smart and at least competent. to anybody talking about skiles job i remind you that only a few years ago the team was coached by a nobody loser and being managed into the ground by a know-nothing jaygoff.
by Daniel Flanagan on Jan 24, 2012 12:57 PM CST reply actions
Seems like you’re just opening the door to a recitation of how many poor decisions our big-hearted but hoops-challenged owner has made.
I recall those times and am glad they’re gone.
How much better off we are now is IMO a currently open question.
I’ve never been one to rag on Skiles for his substitution patterns. But as I watched the end of the 4th quarter, I was incredulous at who wasn’t playing. Thought it must be mass disqualifications. Then later I saw that the coach had simply decided to ignore the group that had finally begun to achieve Bucks potential in those road wins. For inexplicable reasons.
Then reports flood out on bad chemistry, Bogut unhappiness (from him / toward him), Jackson running as a lone wolf, etc.
Those reports don’t have to mean a thing. But where there’s a lot of smoke, there often is fire. I haven’t changed my fan status. I’m waiting in hope that the truth makes an appearance.
who is going to hit them?
We don’t have shooters. We have marginal players whose closest thing to an NBA skill might be described as shooting. Delfino, Dunleavy, Jennings (not marginal), who else comes to mind? They can make enough 3s to be allowed to take them. And they will likely miss enough 3s to contribute to losing.
We’ll probably go after more true shooters. But with our small budget, the affordable ones will not be much good at anything but shooting. and the ones with other NBA skills (like athleticism, defense, etc.) will be too expensive. The players everybody wants.
Luck in the draft is a possibility.
Like Jodie Meeks?
Saaaad tromboooooone
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 2:51 PM CST up reply actions
Luck in the draft is a possibility, but at that fringy playoff spot point we will be picking at...
Most the good players will be gone.
On Wisconsin!
This year might be the exception to that rule
A bunch of top prospects stayed out of last year’s draft because of the impending lockout. Between that and the already-strong class that was heading into this season already, if there’s ever a time to find a diamond in the late lottery, this is the year.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
In fairness I think our weapons are fairly limited
The vast majority of guys on the team have never been efficient NBA scorers…Jax/Jennings certainly aren’t, Gooden has been OK at times but inconsistent, Delfino has never been efficient, and Bogut has been up-and-down as well (most recently well down). Dunleavy and Udrih have been very effective in the past, but they’re not headliners here nor have they gotten any rhythm to date for various reasons (injuries being an obvious one for Dun).
So to some extent I think what we’ve seen on the court over the past two years is just a manifestation of puttng together a bunch of inefficient shooters/scorers. It’s not to say that the dead-last ranking they had last year is acceptable, but I think this team at best is a 20th-25th type offense, especially when you consider the effort Skiles expects from them on the defensive end.
They'd at least win more games if they follow my directions
MOAR LIVINGSTON MOAR FREE THROWS MOAR LEUER SHOTS PLEEZ
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
Our offense will be bad
…as long as we rely on individual effort to generate shots. And settle for shots the opponent is glad to concede to us. Like I thought we did at the end of last night’s game. The shots aren’t good enough; the shooters aren’t skilled enough.
But if the Swarming Hive (plus Leuer, Harris, et al) is moving the ball and attacking with crisp passes we can get and make better shots. I believe that will go a long way toward fulfilling Mitchell’s reasonable demands.
I hope everyone thinks before everyone laughs their heads off but
Does anyone think Boris Diaw as a rent-a-player would help with this offense? I am sure Charlotte would be glad to part with him as long as they get something back in return because they won’t be resigning him. just a thought
"He always plays like he's a pit bull that hasn't been fed in about a year and that you've got pork chops in your pockets and that's the basketball." Of course, he's Canadian
I would have enjoyed a good laugh. But sometimes my lack of knowledge of players who aren’t doing business in Milwaukee leaves me with nothing…
He's the fat guy from the first game of the season.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
See:

SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 3:27 PM CST up reply actions
"Hey Boris, can you run like a fat guy for us? Actually, running like yourself should do the trick. Thanks."
He really killed us in that first game, too. I’d probably rather have him on the team than Gooden (definitely if you factor in contract), but not sure we need to be adding random dudes given we already have 30 people on the roster…
by Frank Madden on Jan 24, 2012 3:40 PM CST up reply actions
Ooh… My… Is he Tiny’s cousin?
He looks… willing… enthusiastic. Like he might volunteer to ring a holiday bell for the Salvation Army. Is he a slow PF or a short C?
What shortcomings does Charlotte see? Looks? Skills? Position?
Boris Diaw is one of those guys
who doesn’t look like he can play, but he can play. Doughy, but capable.
On this team, though, he’d be just another square peg in a round hole. He’s a jack-of-all-trades guy who can play the 3, 4, or 5, but isn’t particularly good at anything specific.
And he’s soft to boot; the rate at which he draws shooting fouls is ABYSMAL.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 5:03 PM CST up reply actions
Ok Barbosa
Another Salmons-like rental that might be possible. As long as Hammond(s) remembers it’s a rental, just looking at players that might not cost much short-term and/or long-term. I remember what we gave up for Salmons and if we could do the same kind of deal? Even give up Sanders, it’s not like he plays anyway.
"He always plays like he's a pit bull that hasn't been fed in about a year and that you've got pork chops in your pockets and that's the basketball." Of course, he's Canadian
Losing Sanders means only one thing
More PT for Gooden.
If Larry can abandon his hacking ways, he’s WAY more valuable as a rim defender than anything Gooden offers on either end of the court.
Plus, Leandro Barbosa would be taking time away from Jennings and Livingston, who just happen to be our two best guards.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 6:51 PM CST up reply actions
Just looking for an offensive infusion
That wouldn’t cripple the team’s future. I’m not sure your first statement is right though, Sanders DNPs get divided up easily.
"He always plays like he's a pit bull that hasn't been fed in about a year and that you've got pork chops in your pockets and that's the basketball." Of course, he's Canadian
Ruh Roh.
I think this article pretty much torpedoes the PNR with Jennings idea…
http://www.hickory-high.com/?p=2832
Really interesting stuff though from a friend of the site, Ian Levy of Hickory High.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
Pfft
What have NUMBERS ever done for us?
/that was depressing
//also makes me look foolish
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 25, 2012 3:23 AM CST up reply actions
Numbers are greatly overrated
Haven’t you noticed how they like to interfere with what you want to think? That’s not helpful.
I’ve heard tell of a software app under development where you take a long Profile test. It figures how what you think, and then it provides you with numbers that conclusively support those thoughts.
I can’t wait.
by unklchuk on Jan 25, 2012 8:35 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Lol.
Reverse-engineering might be something the Bucks could try, too.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 25, 2012 9:49 AM CST up reply actions

by 



















