Jazz 85, Bucks 73: Shorthanded Bucks Brick Their Way To Another Defeat
Just 24 hours after finding no excuses for losing against a tired and under-manned Nuggets team in Denver, the Bucks found out just how quickly the tables can be turned. No Mike Dunleavy (again), no Beno Udrih (shoulder contusion), and most importantly, the Bucks also found themselves without Andrew Bogut due to undisclosed personal reasons. Coming off the Bucks' uninspiring performance in Denver, confidence in Milwaukee's ability to churn out a much-needed win couldn't have been much lower, and apparently the Bucks felt the same way.
Reprising their struggles from a year ago, the Bucks stumbled through their offensive sets early and often, happily settling for long jump shots much of the evening with occasional forays to the hoop rendered mostly ineffective by a long Utah front line that blocked 12 shots and closed down passing lanes around the hoop.
Starters Brandon Jennings, Stephen Jackson, Ersan Ilyasova and Carlos Delfino shot ineptly from start to finish, while the Jazz got just enough from Al Jefferson (26 points on 17 shots) to brush off a second half surge that saw the Bucks crawl back to a 62-59 deficit with 10 minutes remaining.
The Bucks' offensive struggles began immediately, as Milwaukee missed its first six shots en route to a mere 7/29 fg in the first quarter. Still, Utah led by just six after one period, with Al Jefferson having his way with Drew Gooden and the rest of the Bucks' big men in the first half (19 on 11 shots). That offset a scoreless (0/2 fg) half from the Jazz starting backcourt of Raja Bell and Devin Harris, though the reality is that it didn't particularly matter given the Bucks' own problems. Milwaukee shot just 27.5% in the half and 30.5% for the game, but managed to stay within striking distance thanks to offensive rebounding (23 second chance opportunities) and the Jazz's wastefulness with the ball (24 to).
Three Bucks
Drew Gooden. Gooden had his hands full with Jefferson down low, but it's tough to fault the Bucks' $32 million man too much on a night when he mostly matched Utah's leading scorer shot for shot while adding a game-high 12 rebounds to boot. Seven of those boards came on the offensive glass, and when he wasn't doing damage on putbacks he was settling for--but generally hitting (6/11)--those mid-range jumpers he fell in love with last season. Either way, he was the only guy who made at least 50% of his shots and accounted for 12 of the Bucks' 29 field goals.
We can be cynical and point out that of course Gooden's best game would come in an ugly loss, but I suggest we save the cynicism for the players who didn't play well--as in, pretty much everyone else.
Larry Sanders. There was nothing remarkable about Sanders' 16 minutes off the bench tonight, but the threshold for making our "Three Bucks" feature tonight was fairly low: just don't embarrass yourself. Sanders did that mostly by looking like the only Buck physically capable of offering some resistance around the hoop, swatting a pair of shots and getting another couple wiped out by other guys' fouls.
One of the interesting storylines of the season has been Skiles' willingness to give Sanders regular burn after a rookie year in which Skiles seemed consistently underwhelmed by the former VCU star's positioning and basketball IQ. The Bucks have still been bad with him on the court this season, but Sanders has finally begun to rebound and apparently he's not finding himself out of position as regularly as he did last year.
Tobias Harris. Harris once again did not suit up for the Bucks, and for that reason he was one of the Bucks' most useful players tonight. I don't like being this cynical, but it's 100% true--and I would love to see Harris back on a basketball court sooner rather than later. Besides, I can't pick an injured Michael Redd now that he's joined the Suns, can I?
Three Numbers
12. Derrick Favors accounted for five of the Jazz's 12 blocks in just eleven first-half minutes. Summed up the gap in physicality, size and athleticism between the two teams fairly well.
50-48. The Bucks were outrebounded for the fourth time in five games, in spite of hauling down a whopping 23 offensive boards.
11/52. Bucks starters not named Drew Gooden missed 41 of 52 shots (21.1%). To put that in perspective, Yuniesky Betancourt's batting average last year was higher (.252).
Three Good
Uh, Defense? No matter how listless they look on offense, the Bucks always seem to scrape together a respectable effort defensively, don't they? The Jazz's carelessness was a big part of it as well, but the Bucks stayed in it by forcing 24 turnovers, the kind of figure you don't manage without the defense doing something right. Easy to overlook and/or take for granted, but there's a reason the Bucks had a more than vague chance of winning this game.
Gooden! I find it surprising how much outright hatred Gooden seems to inspire among Bucks fans--I get that people may not like his game and no one should like his contract--but let's agree that he was by far the most useful Buck on the court tonight.
Excuses. Chalking up a loss to excuses isn't terribly satisfying, but it's basically the only way the Bucks can rationalize what would have otherwise been an extremely winnable game against a young Utah team. The only positive is that none of the missing players seem to have major injuries, providing hope that the Bucks will shortly be back to full strength.
Three Bad
Aspects of basketball that involve having possession of the ball. We've gotten fairly used to it over the past year, but that doesn't make another unwatchable offensive performance any more palatable. We know Jennings and Jackson aren't bashful about launching wayward jumpers, but tonight they took it to new levels (9/36 combined) and unfortunately had plenty of company (Delfino/Ilyasova 1/8 each). The Bucks' two Oak Hill grads had their moments in other phases of the game (Jennings 6 rebs, 6 ast, 4 stl and Jax 6 rebs, 5 ast, 2 stl), but the more lasting image will be of them missing shot after shot, inside and out.
The Bucks tried to move the ball at times, with Gooden and Jackson flashing some surprising two-man game chemistry on a handful of occasions. But there was mostly just a sad resignation in the way Jennings in particular continued to hoist shots, as though he knew they weren't going in but he had to try anyway. You hoped that he might shake out of it early in the fourth when he flew in for a rare putback bucket, but it just wasn't happening--from near or far. While Jennings' 0/7 night from three jumps out from the box score, he also missed his last six attempts at the rim, at least two of which were point-blank gimmes.
No love for Leuer. Jon Leuer had his worst game as a pro, missing all four of his shots in a scant nine minutes. And yet you couldn't help but feel a bit frustrated watching Sanders and Ilyasova getting critical frontcourt minutes in the second half when the Bucks clearly needed someone to give them an offensive shot in the arm. Odds are Leuer wouldn't have inspired the Bucks to victory, either, but he's been the Bucks' most effective scorer to date and couldn't have hurt a unit that could do nothing to get going offensively.
Missing in action. No details yet on why Bogut missed the game, but you know it's not a good thing when a gamer like Bogut decides he has to leave the team for personal reasons.
Jennings said he found out on the bus to the arena that Bogut would not be with the team when the Bucks center called him.
"He said he had a personal problem going on back at home," Jennings said. "You hope he's OK. I think it caught everybody by surprise."
The biggest fear is that it's something back at home in Australia, in which case Bogut would face the unfortunate decision of whether to stay in the States or make the long trek home to be with his family. We can only hope it ends up not being as serious as feared, but in the meantime we'll cross our fingers for Bogut.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments

http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM CST up reply actions
Badgers lose. Bucks lose.
That’s 5 hours of basketball I got through in 2 hours. After getting home from the meeting. Being a fair-weather fan is great!
by unklchuk on Jan 4, 2012 2:00 AM CST via Android app reply actions
Jennings
Great start to 2012: 9 of 35, 0 for 11 from 3pt range, 9 assists, 8 turnovers. Plus some very sad missed layups.
I never use a big word when a diminutive word would suffice.
He can't shoot
He can barely get the ball to the basket on his 3 point attempts.
by toasterrebound on Jan 5, 2012 12:45 PM CST up reply actions
This made me chuckle under Three Bad:
“Aspects of basketball that involve having possession of the ball.”
Pure gold. Loved it.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 4, 2012 8:20 AM CST via mobile reply actions
It's funny but sad
The Bucks are pretty damn good at the aspects of basketball which don’t involve touching a basketball.
The direction it's headed now
…will if continued result in my losing ALL HOPE for Hammond, or Hammond/Kohl — whichever is the the thing in charge.
This team MUST have a smart, capable GM. If Hammond is a failure, then Woe Is Us.
Clean house
This is as bad as last year, if not worse.
by toasterrebound on Jan 5, 2012 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
That game was terrible...
Hopefully the Bucks were just shell shocked from losing Bogut unexpectedly and will rebound strong the next few games…
Not sure it works
…to look for rhyme or reason with this team. IF they were shell-shocked at the lack of Bogut, then they are a humble bunch indeed. In my new status as Fair-Weather Fan, I didn’t watch — but what I’ve read suggests that the zombie offense was same old same old. Seems to me if they’re missing their big man, they try new things to attempt to compensate, not settle into the same old funk.
I’d agree the next game may be very different. Though I wouldn’t expect it to be because they’re regrouped to meet the challenge. That would require mental follow-through. We’re not big on that.
Outside of Gooden
The Bucks shot 17 of 75! I’m sure Bogut is missed and whatever the issue is important, but this is the worst stretch for him to be missing. But Wilt Chamberlain wouldn’t make a difference with these clangers.
by toasterrebound on Jan 5, 2012 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
Hammonds say hello, and good bye to Angelo>>>
Another game displaying in all its glory the short sightedness in puting together a front line worthy of combat. While the GM/team continue to play ‘musical chairs’ with guards, and SF the front line is treated like a foster child in need of much attention.
Jerry Angelo departs with poor drafting as a core reason for his departure. Quality players absent in a divisiion getting stronger. Hammonds is dangerously close to approaching this ice that grows thinner each season. I’m not going to name names….you know who they are? So, while Scribes, and experts shine the light on Bogut, I was reminded last night, again, just how woefully inadaquate the personnel in general, and the front line specifically is as we watch this team grow. Grow? Sorry>>>
I accept that we must pick players off the clearance table
Right now. There isn’t cap room, there isn’t good franchise rep, there isn’t financial and “franchisal” health to expect us to make undisputedly good signings now.
That’s why our GM MUST be better than other GMs. If Kohl has chosen another No Can Do, then darkness lies ahead…
one word
in·ept (n-pt)
adj.
1. Not apt or fitting; inappropriate.
2.
a. Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish: an inept remark.
b. Bungling or clumsy; incompetent: inept handling of the account.
The first game I get to see - and THIS is what I got??!!
Sure, they were a lil short-handed, but C’MON!
Gooden actually filled in nicely for Bogues – but the rest of the team – and ESPECIALLY BJ – should be ashamed….
Bucks team not responsible for their actions
Things happen to them. Mostly bad. But it’s not their fault. I’m not positive, but I think fault requires involvement in the action. The Bucks are thus fault-free because they have no “intentionality.” They just submit to what happens, And if you do whatever impulse pops into your unfocused mind, you shouldn’t be blamed for the results. It’s all unpremeditated.
Livingston said last night, “We can’t just settle for good shots; we have to get great shots.” “Great” presumably means the odds of making the shot are 43% or more. For the record, “good” apparently means the odds of making the shot are 34% or more. I would agree with that statement. Great is definitely preferable to good. In a more perfect world, ahh… never mind.
I don’t believe he offered any words on how they might acquire those great shots. It’s too late for Christmas. For my part, I’ll keep an eye on those post-holiday sales.
Jennings freely acknowledged that his last two games have been bad. Good to see him man up like that. Of course, the only thing sticking in his craw was that his shots weren’t going down. If I come across a clearance price, I’m going to get him an online course in being a point guard. He might find it an eye-opener.
Bogut is an inspiration for all of us. I, for one, plan to take off personal days too.
And so the world spins on it course and the Buckian melodrama makes my head spin, of course. Best cure for vertigo is to stop being vertical. Time for an early afternoon nap.
When I wake up things may all be changed…
It's really very frustrating.
Why isn’t S.S. sharing any of the blame, though?
A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.
by TwoShoesMcGooze on Jan 4, 2012 5:26 PM CST up reply actions
Winter and reality have set in
Bucks fans are in hibernation. BrewHoop is a ghost town.
I understand that every team has those games where nothing goes in, blah blah blah...
But last nights offensive melt down was epic…
I know it’s early in the season, but if Milw. doesn’t hit .500 this yr, I think Skiles/Hammond are gonna on the ol’ “hot seat” [if they’re not already]
Yeah, I'm less concerned with shots not going in and more concerned with the lack of energy and lack of effort to get to the rim, move without the ball
No one says Skiles is shy...
And he talks over and over about the lack of energy and lack of effort to get to the rim, move without the ball. And still we see it on the court, for long stretches. I’d expect him to pull the guilty, and put in guys who are willing to try. Don’t see that.
Maybe it’s too pervasive. Maybe his team doesn’t understand the language he’s speaking. And he’s peering into the void for what to do.
your option
It’s permissible to replace “And he’s peering into the void for what to do.” with “And he’s peeing into the void for what to do.” Similar meanings, different mental images.
by unklchuk on Jan 4, 2012 2:51 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
I think Skiles will get axed...
…if the Bucks miss the playoffs. Not sure if that’s fair, but I think it’ll happen.
by Dan Sinclair on Jan 4, 2012 12:55 PM CST up reply actions
Kohl loses faith
..in his GMs sooner than in the Coaches. Lots of roster mistakes. We may see change at GM. But grand tortoise Herb may take a long time to haul himself around to a new position. With the team in limbo.
by unklchuk on Jan 4, 2012 3:03 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
I think it's fair.
How easy is it to say, “STOP TAKING JUMP-SHOTS!!!” It’s easy. I’d rather have them missing layups than missing these jumpers, because layups at least have a >10% chance of going in. He’s made changes in pace, which I guess is nice, but with 23 forced turnovers they should be scoring a LOT more than the ~47 points they score each night. Pathetic.
A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.
by TwoShoesMcGooze on Jan 4, 2012 5:34 PM CST up reply actions
I agree - but his record in 3+ yrs is pretty dismal...
I think he’s a good coach, and would only support the firing if the Bucks get someone better [doubtful]
But he really didn’t have a chance his first and third yrs because of injuries – i think it’s a lack of talent and ill fitting players that have really hurt him and the team.
I’d prefer them blow the whole roster up, rather than watch a sub-mediocre team yr after yr after yr.
Guess I don't know if Skiles is a good coach
Seems to be for defense
Seems to be for character issues, and perspective
Hasn’t done well with offense
The fact that Bucks would pick him and he would accept may testify against him… ;)
Looks like I didn't miss much, but good to hear that Gooden played well tonight
Where is Bogut at the moment? Is he in Utah or elsewhere?
Hammond has done OK with what he has had to work with.
A few things to remember:
- Hammond had to unwind the disastrous, overpriced roster that Larry Harris threw together in order to get Milwaukee’s fiscal situation in order.
- The draft picks Hammond has had so far have been at 8,10,15, and 10. Not exactly the ideal draft positions to find All Stars. Of his picks, only Alexander has been an abject failure, draft position considered. He has also done as good job as any GM in the league of finding rotation players in the 2nd round
- In FA, he had a bad summer in 2010 when he resigned Salmons and signed Gooden for long term contracts. The team’s inspired performance in the 09-10 playoffs probably was a factor in him over reaching in FA.
I guess the way I measure Hammond’s success is to ask if the Bucks roster situation is better now than it was when he started. I say yes, especially when contracts are considered.
And he has an owner who's priority is to win now.
by Jacob Grinyer on Jan 4, 2012 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
Is there any chance of getting a new owner in the near future?
Someone with more patience and an understanding of how to build a successful long term franchise would be beneficial to everyone involved.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 4, 2012 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
there have been trace hints
…that the Brewers Attanasio might be interested at the head of a group. In an interview, Attanasio didn’t deny all interest.
But I suspect that something positive will have to happen to the franchise before it has any credibility as a purchase. I think that’s part of the impetus behind Win Now.
My dream is that Attanasio buys the team, brings the same smart and non-stingy management to it, and that Herb Kohl becomes an even bigger local hero by using part of the proceeds to fund part of a new arena.
If that happens, I deserve a plaque. Plus medical attention to revive me… ;)
To be saleable ....
Franchises normally slash expenses. So until the Bucks get into more of a rebuild mode, they will not be that tempting to prospective owners. There is also the issue of a new venue; that too might be an implied, if not specified, condition of sale.
There's another question
Where, oh where, would a new venue be located?
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 4, 2012 10:16 PM CST up reply actions
Another question entirely ..
I reside in the camp that is vehemently against another brand new building. The Bradley Center is barely 20 years old.
Sir, we are in different camps ;)
I have always hated the Bradley Center as a place to watch basketball. IMO, the Petits had it designed oversize for hockey (a most unfortunate sport ;) and thus the audience is remote from the action. The first time I stood in the corner of the upper deck, I thought I was in a different zip code from the court. A pair of eagles drove me away from their nest. Still have the scar.
The best lower deck seats are OK. That makes it a towering example, in my cantankerous view, of planning for the well off and ignoring the common man.
May aliens establish their nursery in the Bradley Center, and humans never set foot in it again.
Sir, the bottom line is that I call your vehemence and raise you 2 stubborns and 1 intractable.
by unklchuk on Jan 4, 2012 10:49 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Dunleavy Q?
Is Dunleavy going to start over Delfino you guys think when both are healhty? How is that rotation going to go, has Skiles made any remarks on that situation? I’m in the Bay Area, a warrior fan actually, but like the comeback story of Dunleavy and I think he’s better than Delfino right now.. What’s the consensus in Milwaukee?
By the way, here’s my crappy take on my team, the Warriors if anyone is interested!
http://warriorsrundown.blogspot.com/
Dunleavy
…is currently the most popular of our GM’s acquisitions. Fans think he’s a bargain, and the recognize that he’s smart enough and dedicated enough to jumpstart our offense with ball movement and his constant activity. He does things others should be doing as well, but often aren’t.
Most (perhaps including Skiles) think Delfino makes a very good sub. Most of the time. He’s given to some erratic-ness.
The offense has probably looked best with Dunleavy on the floor
He impressed many of us with how quickly he stepped in and “got things moving”. In Milwaukee’s two wins (and even a good chunk of the loss in Charlotte), the offense was actually quite fun to watch: lots of movement both on and off the ball, quick pace, good transition game. Dunleavy seemed to be involved in those stretches more often than not.
I think the general idea is that Carlos is a slightly better defender (just a little quicker than Mike) and, outside of the occassional cold streak, a similarly capable shooter. IMO he’s built perfectly to come off the bench, and when Dunleavy returns I’d be surprised if he doesn’t step right back into the starting lineup.

by 


















