The Bratwurst - Milwaukee Bucks Blog

Recently a commentor on this blog brought up an interesting point — can you remember a team that has gotten blown out as regularly as this one has? The Bucks have lost nine games this season by 20+ points. In the greater scheme of things, is that a lot?

First I looked at the record of recent Bucks teams.

2007-08 Bucks (18-27): 9 blowouts (on pace for 18)
2006-07 Bucks (28-54): 8
2005-06 Bucks (40-42): 5
2004-05 Bucks (30-52): 5
2003-04 Bucks (41-41): 2
2002-03 Bucks (42-40): 6
2001-02 Bucks (41-41): 7
2000-01 Bucks (52-30): 1

I’m sure it isn’t much of a surprise that the number of 20+ losses correlates pretty closely with how good a team is that season. But how unusual it is for a team to get blown out as often as the Bucks have this season? I tried to think of the worst recent teams I could remember and checked out how often they got blown out:

1992-93 Dallas Mavericks (11-71): 26 times
1986-87 LA Clippers (12-70): 23
1991-91 Denver Nuggets (20-62): 22
1997-98 Denver Nuggets (11-71): 22
2002-03 Cleveland Cavaliers (17-65): 19
1972-73 Philadelphia 76ers (9-73): 18
1995-96 Philadelphia 76ers (18-64: 18
2007-08 Milwaukee Bucks — on pace for 18
1999-00 Chicago Bulls (17-65): 16
1991-92 Minnesota Timberwolves (15-67): 6
2006-07 Memphis Grizzlies (22-60): 5

What do the Bucks have in common with these teams? Absolutely nothing! They are miles better than all of them, have already won more games this season than most of them did, and are still very much alive in the playoff race. But the Bucks get blown out as regularly as they did!

Just to make sure blowouts aren’t an exceptionally common thing this year, here is how often the worst teams in the league this season are getting blown out.

2007-08 Miami Heat: 5
2007-08 Minnesota Timberwolves: 6

I think it is pretty clear: the Bucks are too good to be getting blown out as often as they are. So the next question is: why is it happening?

The most obvious thing to look at is the coaching. The Bucks’ record alone shows that they have more talent than those on the “worst team” list. Take out the nine times the team simply hasn’t shown up and the Bucks are a .500 team. So the talent level isn’t the problem.

I’ve written plenty about how much I haven’t liked Krystkowiak’s rotations and his team philosophy. Maybe in the long run he is right about the defense-first philosophy, but it’s something that will take longer than one season to implement. But I don’t think that’s correct. Since the team gets blown out every time they go on the road against a good team, I think that’s a pretty strong indictment of that rationale. Looking at the number of blowouts in past Bucks seasons it’s clear that run-and-gun keeps the Bucks in games more often than does slowing down the pace.

The rotations are another problem. When things haven’t worked (Gadzuric at backup center, Simmons playing more than 15 minutes) Krystkowiak’s solutions haven’t gone much beyond benching the offending player. He still uses Redd and Bell at small forward and Ivey far too much (although with Redd and Villanueva out against Washington, he had no choice) despite the fact that it consistently doesn’t work. His failure to try and force mismatches (instead of letting bad matchups work against him) has been a part of the reason the team has not been able to stop oppositions from exploiting the Bucks’ weaknesses at times, leading to long runs.

But I thought of another potential cause. What if the problem is Yi Jianlian?

On the WSSP postgame show after the Washington game, host Steve Phifer asked Royal Ivey about the final play of regulation — where Mo pounded the ball until the clock ran down, then couldn’t get anything better than a contested three-pointer at the buzzer. Ivey was asked if that isolation was the play or if the play call had been broken and Mo had to freelance.

Ivey’s response was that it was supposed to be a high screen-roll, but Yi didn’t understand the play (language barrier) and never came out to set the screen.

This actually explains a lot of things. I have long wondered why they don’t pick-and-roll with Yi all the time, or apparently call many plays for him. Could it be that he has a hard time understanding enough English to pick up a play call on the fly? Or that many of the defensive breakdowns that happen could be stopped if Yi could better understand a teammates call for help?

Think of it this way — if Yi makes four such defensive mistakes a game, that would probably result in about two extra baskets per game (figure the oppositions shooting percentage on those posessions goes from 50% to nearly 100%). That four point difference in the long run would result in about 2 or three extra losses, but if Yi has bad games against particularly loud crowds (such as an even harder time hearing his teammates on the road in front of vocal opposing crowds) then his mistakes would probably snowball in those games. And that would most likely happen against good teams that get a lot of crowd support.

That’s an interesting theory that might bear some watching as the season continues. And the good thing is that you can be sure that Yi’s English will only get better with time.

Either way, though, the Bucks simply have to find a way to stop the blowouts. There is a big difference between trailing by 25 with two minutes remaining and trailing by 10. Even though you will almost always lose those games, if you trail by 10 then the door is still open for something strange to happen — like Washington’s 11-0 run on Sunday night where every ball suddenly bounced their way with a minute to go. If you keep it even semi-close then you never know when you might be able to steal a win.

And, in this bizarre season where the Bucks find themselves nine games under .500 and only one game out of a playoff spot, stealing one game might mean the difference between playing in the postseason and staying home.