Back At The Starting Line In Milwaukee
by Alex Boeder on Jan 25, 2012 7:00 AM CST
in Originals
Email
PrintThe Bucks tried 23 different starting lineups last season. Just one of them won more than four games, and that one had a losing record.
I asked Scott Skiles on Media Day whether he hoped, for the sake of consistency, to settle on a starting lineup this season.
Skiles: "Be nice. Be really nice."
As a natural follow-up, I asked Skiles if he had a starting lineup in mind for this season.
Skiles: "No. Not yet."
Through 16 games this season, the Bucks have already tried seven different starting lineups. With the team now at full strength, I asked Skiles after the loss to Atlanta if he feels any closer to finding an ideal starting five.
Skiles: "You know, I am not sure. That is a tough question to answer. You typically would like to base that on the players sort of showing that to you based on consistency and how they perform. And that has been difficult for us so far.
It is not so much about just who starts or just who finishes, but it is so, so much about who plays together. So who is really playing together and playing together, and who is playing together, and not playing together?
Three Good
Jennings/Livingston/Delfino/Leuer/Bogut
This starting lineup is 2-0, making it the only undefeated starting lineup. It worked against the Knicks and it worked against the Heat, two of the shiniest wins of the season. Yet, curiously enough, this quartet has only played 10 minutes together all season. In that time, they have outscored opponents 25-20. They started pretty nicely against New York, up 13-8 before Leuer was subbed out for Drew Gooden, and they were tied 10-10 with Miami when Luc Mbah a Moute came in for Leuer.
Skiles has long been a proponent of playing point guards together, and Jennings and Livingston not only mesh well offensively (and they do, with a +8 differential in 231 minutes), they have been two of the best offensive players on the team under any and all circumstances. And the two-man combination of Livingston and Leuer has performed exactly how you and you and you think it has performed: a team-best +49 in 122 minutes together.
I have devoted enough sentences to differential (which is subject to a lot of variables, most obviously opponent, and is a notoriously noisy stat) but this lineup passes the eye test just as well as the statistical ones. Here is to hoping that we don't have to wait 16 more games to watch these five play another 10 minutes together.
Jennings/Livingston/Delfino/Mbah a Moute/Bogut
The only difference here from the previous lineup is Mbah a Moute instead of Leuer. This group has played almost 20 minutes together, making it the sixth most common lineup so far. Livingston's career splits as a starter are pretty much even with his career numbers as a reserve, and with Udrih on the bench to back up Jennings (who also averages 36 minutes) anyway, I don't see any reason to hesitate starting Livingston. While we might prefer that he not be quite as low-usage as he is, Livingston undeniably complements Jennings, allowing both players to function as the hybrid guards that they are and allowing the Bucks to play at an accelerated pace.
While The Prince, after all of these years, is still not really a power forward, he boasts a history of success starting at at the four, most notably going 14-3 as part of the Jennings/Salmons/Delfino/Mbah a Moute/Bogut lineup in 2009-10 (this reference point is admittedly sadly running drier by the day). This group won't necessarily work in every situation, and it doesn't have to -- but it can and should work with some real frequency.
Delfino is always the wild card, but pairing the team's two most effective guards heretofore with two of the best defensive players in the NBA is an attractive option, particularly as these two (point) guards should theoretically be among the most adept players at helping get the offensively-challenged Mbah a Moute and Bogut into the game offensively.
Jennings/Jackson/Dunleavy/Ilyasova/Bogut
This is how it all started. And while it (referring to the Bobcats game) didn't end very well, it started okay. Skiles started these five for the first three games of the season, and while those three games foreshadowed the dizzy year to date, the team did win two of three.
Jackson tends to start when he is not suspended, and if he is going to start, this might be the best lineup in which to start him. Jennings and Bogut are the anchors, the givens, as you may have followed by now. This lineup has been linked pretty regularly -- for 43 minutes over 4 different games -- and they have shown well together, with a +10 differential. This is a lineup that Skiles goes to third most, and for good reason -- it has a dominant defensive rating of 85.39, making it easily the best defensive grouping to play substantial minutes.
Again, these numbers are based on sample sizes that are still very small. But even on paper, this one holds some intrigue. I am not sure that there is a single player who does not consistently hustle on this team, and I am not sure that there are more than a handful of players in the NBA who don't consistently give their all, every night, no matter what college hoops fans tell you. All that said, this is a physically long lineup, and a lineup short on physically casual play.
Two Bad
Jennings/Jackson/Delfino/Ilyasova/Gooden
This group has actually played the second most minutes -- 67 -- of any group this season. And while it is too early to conclusively judge any of these lineups, we are inconclusively judging lineups, and this one is not the best.
As the team has moved forward without a real backup center, Gooden has been spending virtually all of his time at the five -- a year after essentially splitting time between the four and five. He rebounds and he stretches the court some, but he has quite simply been far better at power forward than center since arriving in Milwaukee. Last season he had a PER differential of +2.9 at power forward and a PER differential of -7.2 at center -- in almost the exact same number of minutes! Try to find another time I used an exclamation mark.
So, this seems to be more on needing a center who is a center than on Gooden. In any event, offensively, this group is short on consistently sound decision-makers, and defensively, this group has so far been simply destroyed, with a 120.61 defensive rating.
Jennings/Jackson/Delfino/Leuer/Gooden
This has not worked out so well either. Obviously these Gooden lineups aren't under consideration for the starting lineup anyway, but they speak to how much better the team is with Bogut on the court and, more to the point, how ill-fitting Gooden continues to be at the five. This group has an even worse defensive rating (133.3 in 17 minutes) than the previous one.
One Shot?
Jennings/Jackson/Mbah a Moute/Gooden/Bogut
If Gooden is best-suited at power forward, which his advanced stats back up, and which is where he had started in 421 of 447 (94.2 %) career starts coming into this season, shouldn't he ideally play there? And while Mbah a Moute's numbers historically suggest he is too much of an offensive liability at the three, might the 6'8" defensive ace find his way while playing alongside a power forward with at least some ability to spread the floor and with a high usage and offensively-inclined backcourt? Is this arguably not the most talented, balanced lineup possible?
Jennings/Jackson/Mbah a Moute/Gooden/Bogut have not lined up for a minute together this season.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"big 3"?
I feel the strongest lineup has Jennings, Bogut, and Mbah a Moute. That’s who should have been in at the end of the Hawks game. That is our strongest core. As for the other 2, it is not yet clear who is best and I don’t mind some play there. So in keeping w/ the cleverness just posted on Bucksketball, how bout committed to those 3, dallying still with the other 2 positions [among which maybe starting Mbah a Moute at the 3]
I too would love to move Gooden back to the 4. Any chance we’d get Pryzbilla as backup 5?
I think you attended the Hawk game
…any thoughts, feelings, or vibes picked up at the game that relate to the lineups used? Not sure what they might be. But when “live,” I sometimes think I see body language, etc. on the bench and in time-outs.
Most of us, I’m guessing, have stopped thinking about Pryz. It makes too much sense. And when sensible things involve the Bucks, either the Bucks look the other way or the other party looks at the team, drops his jaw, and mutters, “what the hell was I thinking?”
Pryz has said he’s healthy. Maybe he ain’t. Or maybe he’s calmly waiting for a contender to offer him 2X what the Bucks would pay him. And a chance to win. Or maybe being a family man feels too damn good…
one small thing
during time outs, the guys “in” always sit while the others stand. But when Jackson was in, he always stood during time outs. I was wondering why he does that. Does he always? Was that part of his not shooting? Every time out in the 4th quarter, the other 4 guys playing sat and Jackson stood w/ the guys not “in.”
Have no idea if this means anything.
But, yes, I was there, and I sit right behind the Bucks bench…
Fourth quarter Bogut looked like he knew he wasn’t going in… though I can’t say why/how I knew that
And most important of all, Jane
Did you called Delfino a “maricon” as Canada bucks expected? (hopefully, not) :) As unklchuk, I would also like to have some insight of what goes on in Bucks bench.
no to insult
I did not/would not call Carlitos a “maricon” although I would love to get his attention I am both too shy and have no desire to insult him
I just Wiktionaried maricon
…and I’m glad you didn’t call him that. It’s meaning is an insult only if one has formed their gender attitudes about 50 years ago in a small, hermetically-sealed Pleasantville town. In my church calling someone a maricon has no more sting than calling them a heterosexual. Gender choices are not moral choices – it’s more like going into the ice cream shop and choosing your flavor. If it’s your flavor, it’s a good flavor.
Wikipedia: Noun. maricón m (plural maricones)
(pejorative) homosexual man, queer, faggot
So… a woman calling Carlos a maricon would not likely be a successful conversational gambit. ;)
I am sorry to have blown this up to 1015% of its natural size. I absolutely imply nothing amiss to CanadaBucks. Nada. But UUs believe we need to speak up on some things. Not to demand that others agree; just to be on the record. Plus, as an old curmudgeon, I have my own almost-instinctual negative reactions to gender differences that must be denied a voice inside my head.
Stopping now.
Ok I meant no harm
It was a simple prank, my apologies to anyone offended.
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 10:00 AM CST up reply actions
Never for a microsecond
…did I think you meant any harm.
I don’t think anyone was offended. Don’t think anyone saw it as more than a simple prank. I like pranks. Just needed to speak that piece for “cosmic reasons.” Not for you.
I need to work on a website. See y’all later…
I believe "maricón" can also be an insult between two gay people
A soft one, by the way. At least in Argentina. It can be used as “queer” but also as “pussy” (I’m not sure how appropiate is for me to write these words, so sorry if I’m offending someone;). I can even call my wife or my daughter don’t be a “maricona”, like a “crybaby”. But insults have a lot to do with entonation.
(Maybe maricón in México is a much stronger insult, I don’t know)
trust me
Next time try with a “Vamos, Cabeza” or a “Vamos, lancha”. You’ll probably get a smile in return.
OK I have a need
If this forum is going bi-lingual, I need a link to a good Spanish/English dictionary. Is that a fair request?
Yesterday I Googled to find out how to say “he says” in Spanish. Up came a page with hundreds of words. And no nice simple translation. Is there a place that will tell me what “vamos, cabeza” and “vamos, lancha” mean? I thought “vamos” meant “go”. Maybe not.
Is that a fair request?
Si senor google translator?
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 10:11 AM CST up reply actions
And since Canada is officially a bilingual country
Perhaps we should be tri-lingual and add French, parlez vous francais?
Hopefully no one is Swiss as my Romansch sucks
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 10:18 AM CST up reply actions
only if
…we get a French-speakiing Buck player. Do you know something we don’t?
Today would be a good day for a roster move. Quiet the natives. Maybe when Jim & Jon begin tonight’s telecast they’ll look like canary-eating cats and say that Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxxxx won’t be playing tonight. And that the team will have an announcement after the game.
That’s happened a few times in my 40-year fan career. It’s always interesting. But my memory has blocked out whether the results have been generally good or not.
Luc might speak French(French is common in Africa due to colonization I guess)
A few french born players in the NBA…..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_NBA_players
Including Boris Diaw who I mentioned yesterday
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
But that doesn't
Mean I know anything because rest assured I surely don’t.
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 11:11 AM CST up reply actions
You know what you can do?
Choose some American player playing abroad in a Spanish-spoken market, find the blog of his team and start commenting right away. That will surely improve your skills. Hopefully you’ll fin some forum as nice as this one. :)
Palomba translator:
He says: “el dice”
“Vamos, Cabeza”: “Go, Head!”
“Vamos, cabezón” “Go, big head”
“Vamos, Lancha:: “Go, motorboat”
is it a good thing?
To be a head? Or a motorboat? Is it better to be a big head?
And if y’all are answering questions, why do the threads I get involved in regularly get dragged off the path and into the undergrowth?
Am I existentially irrelevant?
And if I am, is that because I have no firm grasp on advanced stats?
I know I said I was going to work. But right now I’m working on lunch. I do some of my best work eating.
In most cases, is not
but is very common here to name people after physical atributes, so usually nobody gets ofended. You experienced that, skinny.
Delfino, who is continually joking and making pranks, is one of the few who calls Ginobili, “narigón” (big nose) and is always making jokes around it. Here you have his last one: Scola is showing he payed last night dinner with him. Carlos had been joking with Ginobili in twitter around the possibilty he would not do it.
About the motorboat thing, a very uncommon nickname, I have no idea where it comes from.
I'd like to
thanks for lines that could get a smile…
to be honest, not only do I like Delfino as a basketball player but I also think he’s very handsome, which makes me both want to address him and afraid to
ahh... but all the popular movies
…teach us that the shy must be bold. Only then will the doors of opportunity start to open.
Which movies or not is basically true. I spent (brace yourself) 70 years as a very shy person. Very afraid in groups (my heart would pound, my tongue would freeze).
True story. I was a Disaster Communication Officer (which is NOT Chicken Little) at a Minnesota flood site for the Department of Housing & Urban Development. My associates loved the news releases I wrote. They boggled at my shyness. There was a morning staff meeting, where I typically had no role. It terrified me so much I went to a doctor. He had some trouble believing me, but prescribed valium. Made the meetings much easier. Then the assignment ended.
At our church, there’s a congregational response after the sermon. For the first 10 years I said nothing. Taking the microphone to say something was unthinkable. Then 2 years ago, it felt different. Didn’t think about it (typical mistake); just took the mike and talked. Since then, after sermons, I have something to add more often than not. And it’s NEVER a big deal.
Shyness and inhibition is one huge waste of time. And time is what makes up the fabric of your life. If any of you are shy, push push push at the shyness. Small steps oft repeated. It will in time collapse. You’ll wonder why you ever thought it had any substance. Fear, more often than not, is mostly facade…
by unklchuk on Jan 25, 2012 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm almost the reverse of that, but not for a few more months.
The fact that we come together on a consistent basis for nice conversations is a testament to the power of the internet, am I right?
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 12:02 PM CST up reply actions
Indeed
I’m amazed. Chuk, I thought you may be in your late thirties and Steve, in your, early ones. I hope both assumptions work well for both of you. I’m 46 by the way.
And for what you tell us, Chuk, still working and finding some pleasure in it. Amazing. Hope the same happens with me when I (hopefully) get to your age.
when 26-year-olds use the word "nice"
What do they mean? Lots of folk today, in my limited experience, use it to mean inoffensive but not energizing. Kinda blah. “She did a nice job, but we can do better.”
But I suspect you may be an outlier in that regard. You appear to mean it (and you’ve used it before) with its “classic” meaning. “Good.” Get that from your parents?
I like short words. My rule on that is famous, but only famous in the tiny circle of which I am a part. The rule is “If it’s long, it’s wrong!” That’s especially pertinent in meetings of committees, since committees (in grasping for consensus) cobble together the most absurd of verbal concoctions. I don’t often win those arguments (consensus trumps clarity), but the rule puts me on the side of the angels. ;)
So nice is fine by me.
+1
he is easy on the eyes. nice bonus to being a decent player, too :-)
If they fire Skiles (a popular idea in some places; I say No Comment), Kohl should send a tsunami through the NBA and hire a woman coach. It’s time (at least it could be time if they force it). Certainly would distract from team troubles.
And Carlos might well get more appreciation and PT.
Carlos no doubt knows he’s “easy on the eyes.” And NBA-rich. Wonder how and if he stays out of temptation’s way?
I honestly think we need to keep leuer in the starting line up he has so much upside and potential.
by hoffie20 on Jan 25, 2012 8:47 AM CST via iPhone app reply actions
I'm a Leuer fan for sure, and a UW enthusiasm/alumnus who has enjoyed his play for a while, but I'd be careful about the upside and potential.
He can get better at the things you already see him do on the court, but I don’t think he will ever be an impact player. More of an efficient and diversely-skilled role player, which is not a bad thing at all. Remember he’s a second round pick. If the potential and upside were higher, he’d have gone much earlier.
This is not to push back at enthusiasm for Leuer, but rather to say I plan of focusing my enthusiasm to what he does well already and how he can apply it 15-20 min a game. That’d be a very nice NBA career.
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 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
I keep telling myself that
But honestly, I can’t come up with many reasons why he can’t be an impact player, if you simply define “impact player” as a player who strongly contributes to his team winning. So far he’s shown that he won’t be a liability on the boards, he’ll play very smart defense, and he’s a very smooth offensive player who offers tremendous floor spacing. Maybe the guy will never be a 20/10 guy, but if his shooting is really this good (probably the biggest question), why couldn’t he score 15-18 as a starter getting around 30 minutes?
All of that is dependent on him keeping up his per-minute production, but with his spot in the rotation seemingly evaporated, it might be tough to build much more of a case than what he’s already got.
by Dan Sinclair on Jan 25, 2012 11:09 AM CST up reply actions
I think he might have trouble beating anyone off the dribble and guarding really athletic 4s.
If teams find he can’t do more than the one-dribble pull-up, they might start to close out very hard on his jumper and make his life difficult.
The good news is I think Jon make the best of any way the defense tries to play him, including some tougher drives if they belly up. I’d love to see him play upwards of 25 minutes until he proves he can’t match his early performance level, but something tells me he would be optimized at 15-20 min.
I’ll be interested to see how defenses approach him after they start to see him more on tape and pay attention to him in their schemes. I expect a mix of what I described above, but it is something I intend to watch closely.
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 12:06 PM CST up reply actions
Honestly he's been good enough to justify it even w/o the upside argument
He’s been a very efficient, productive offensive player and he’s at least held his own defensively. Best /- on the team (8 on the court, – 8 w/o him). No upside needed when you’re doing that.
by Frank Madden on Jan 25, 2012 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
Right. I think he deserves 15-20 min per game, until he proves otherwise.
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 10:42 AM CST up reply actions
Totally agree, Frank
I was thinking the same thing before I read your post. Who cares about upside; he has played more than well enough to justify a start, and increased PT.
I chose write in
I like 1 with Luc instead of Delfino. I realize that might impact the outside shooting threat, but I have always felt that Luc should start so he can be matched up against the other teams best(Orlando obviously not but you get the picture) Two would be my second choice.
"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
One I'd like to see us roll with
Jennings/Livingston/Jackson/Moute/Bogut
Looked good at the end of the Miami game (or Knicks game I can’t exactly remember), but this line-up moves the ball well and defends well. It gets our best players on the floor together.
until the 4th quarter, of course
when we should be playing an over-burdened Jennings, a passive-resistance Jackson, a still scrambling to crawl back in the life-raft Dunleavy, whatever power forward has been in that game invisible, and coat-of-many-colors Dwight Gooden.
Right?
Would have voted for that one
If it was on the list :)
"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
by CanadaBucks on Jan 25, 2012 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
this was my choice
for a write in as well. I think you have to start Jackson if you hope to get anything out of him. But my god do we need a back-up center. Gooden is a terrible defensive 5.
by Charlie_Buckets on Jan 25, 2012 1:35 PM CST up reply actions
Jennings, Livingston, Delfino, Luer and Bogut is the best combination
Jennings can play off the ball if he wants and let Livingston handle the ball handling and facilitating since Jennings seems to have no more interest in doing that. Livingston and Leur are probably the two most reliable offensive players as compared to Stephen Jackson or Mike Dunleavy, both whom I believe are over the hill. Drew Gooden is suited best in the second unit backing up Bogut.
by Jeffrey Thompson on Jan 25, 2012 12:00 PM CST reply actions
I'd contest that
Drew Gooden is suited best for the DNP-CD unit
Jennings, Livingston, Dunleavy, Moute, Bogut
The variation here from the offered choices being Dunleavy instead of Delfino. I just think Dunleavy is more versatile offensively and can contribute as a point-maker more as a starter on a regular basis than Delfino. His game seems to complement these running mates well and vice-versa.
I’m also intrigued by what could happen with Udrih, Jackson, and Delfino going against other teams’ second units.
I think people are overlooking the contributions Dunleavy and Udrih are likely to make over the course of the season based on banged-up and rusty starts.
I like Dunleavy a lot.
I think the two are somewhat interchangeable, though Dun is a better passer, Carlos probably the better defender from what I’ve seen. Wish Dun was getting warm from three, would make things a lot easier…
by Frank Madden on Jan 25, 2012 7:06 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Larry Bird calls his Indiana Pacers “soft” following the team’s physical Game 5 loss to Miami
- Dexter Pittman’s elbow to Lance Stephenson’s throat is just one of three nasty hits in Miami/Indiana’s Game 5 (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat split the Indiana Pacers in two
- Metta World Peace calls Mike Brown fat
- Tracy McGrady is in a Chinese beer commercial (VIDEO)
