It’s time for another edition of everyone’s favorite infrequently posted blog segment, the NBA Clothing Spotlight. With the Bucks recent hot play, this item is centered around one of the deer that should be feared.
Moute Kicks Boute
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute is the silent assassin on the Bucks. He typically has to defend the best offensive player on the other team, be it Dirk Nowitzki or Kevin Durant. As a reward for his hard work, Mbah a Moute never gets a single play called for him. So how does he post a career average of seven points a game? The offensive glass. Despite being undersized as a starting power forward, Luc Richard yanks down over two offensive rebounds a game. Those rebounds usually go straight back up and result in two points for the good guys.
How can you honor a defensive stopper who is arguably the hardest worker in the league? Buy his t-shirt.
In order to take a charge, Bogut has to establish position — think of him turning himself into a column that “owns” the vertical space from the floor to the ceiling. In order to commit a charge, the offensive player must head-on violate that space that the defensive player has now claimed as his own. Think of it as the offensive player must knock over the column that the defensive player has just created. The offensive player must start in front of the defender and wind up in the same spot where the defender once was.
In this case, Kobe was going at an angle, striking a glancing blow against the “column” that Bogut had created, but not “knocking it over”. Kobe wound up beside the space Bogut had claimed, not behind it. This meant that Bogut (who had initiated the contact by establishing position on the floor and preventing Kobe from continuing his drive across the lane) had fouled Kobe.
I’m not sure about the claim of a travel beforehand, but the rules were clearly redefined this year to give players two steps and a jump rather than the previously wishy-washy (and physically impossible) 1 1/2 steps and jump. Kobe can go 7-8 feet without traveling.
For all the complaining about the officials, the bottom line is that the Bucks had 3 free throws that would have won or at the very least forced a second overtime. They missed all three.
This was an example of two teams being evenly matched, but one team having better players than the other.
As long as I’ve been a basketball fan, people around me have always claimed the refs were against “my” team. High school? The refs were against us because our team was mostly black and the other teams in our conference were all suburban white. University of Illinois? The refs were against us because Bobby Knight had them all scared of him. DePaul? The refs … I don’t even know why. The Bulls? Okay, nobody complained about the officiating when they were winning every game by 20 per night. The Bucks … small market paranoia. Every fan base thinks the officials are out to get them. It’s a problem endemic to basketball because of the speed of the game and the ambivalent definition of so many of the calls. Replay wouldn’t help block/charge calls because the explanation would have to be accompanied by dictionary definitions and telestrator analysis that still wouldn’t make half of the viewers happy.
It was a great game. The Bucks’ execution wasn’t as good as it needed to be. There may have been a free throw imbalance, but if the Bucks had made 87% of theirs like the Lakers did, the outcome would have been different. Too many long jumpers early in the shot clock. Redd shot 2-8 on three pointers. Jennings took one that apparently got him benched. You can’t expect Kobe Bryant to miss two game winning shots from the same spot in the floor when he’s being guarded by a guy who is 6′3″. I would have rather seen Mbah a Moute on him late, although Bell did do everything he could against him. You can say that if a team blows a 6 point lead in overtime then something is wrong, but remember in the Bucks’ last game against Portland, the Blazers did the exact same thing … twice.
Do the officials favor, or at least “respect” star players more than others? Yes, I don’t think there’s much doubt about that. But there is a chicken vs. egg argument about that. The best players are the best players, so they create more situations where the benefit of the doubt goes their way. That’s why I like the future of Brandon Jennings — once he starts getting some calls then he might become Iverson-esque unstoppable. That’s why Redd not being 100% makes his value pretty low, because he isn’t driving and drawing fouls like he used to. But the game isn’t fixed.
As I left the game last night, my friend said to me, “You know, after a loss like that, it almost feels worse than a blowout.” Then he thought for a minute and said, “I guess it could have been 110-80. That would have been a lot worse.”
So the question stands, is the NBA rigged against Milwaukee? I have to say no. I just can’t believe it. Maybe it’s denial because I simply love the NBA too much, but I think there is also plenty of evidence to support that the NBA is not rigged against Milwaukee.
The Lakers in Milwaukee routinely brings out a large number of casual fans. Enough that it annoys Andrew Bogut (a tweet from last year that I believe started his progression towards making Squad Six). Those casual fans are going to judge a book by its cover, and tonight was the night for which they’ll likely base their opinion of the NBA for the year (with the exception of watching highlights of Jennings’ 55). Regardless if that’s right or wrong, there are a few things they will certainly miss.
The Bucks routinely give up more free throws than they take. Yes the spread was a lot tonight, but the Lakers are good team that can get to the line. The Bucks, as a product of their Scott Skiles style of defense, are a team that commits a lot of fouls. The stats on 82games confirm that through 22 games the Bucks have committed 100 more shooting fouls than their opponents which results in at least a 200 free throw deficiency. The Lakers taking 16 more free throws than the Bucks isn’t that astounding, considering that usually give teams at least 9 more free throws a game. Not to mention how many times the Bucks get in the penalty early in a quarter, turning non-shooting fouls into free throws. No sign of the game being rigged because of the free throw discrepancy.
The Bucks had chances to win, despite any rigging by the refs. Bogut could have made the free throw near the end of regulation. Michael Redd could have had a better shot selection. Ersan Illyasova could have made at least one of his free throws in the closing minute.
The block/charge call is the hardest call for a ref to make. It just has to be. It’s often enough a split second decision, not to mention a call that quickly result in a five-point swing (two points the other way vs the three point play). It’s simply not a call you can make correctly every time down the court.
I think the ref made the wrong call on the play, but I don’t think the game is rigged. It’s simply a call refs get wrong, frequently.
Brandon Jennings gave the casual fan in Milwaukee a reason to care this year, just enough of a push to finally leave home on a frigid night and see the Bucks take on the defending champs. With that, the Bucks still couldn’t fill up the arena, drawing only 16,309. The casual fan in Milwaukee has been so put off by the team’s struggles of the past few years that the Bucks couldn’t manage to sell out the arena against either of the game’s biggest stars (drawing 16,625 against Lebron). Disheartening for a team that has given fans so many reasons to care this year. So many reasons to believe things are headed in the right direction.
Unfortunately the casual fans that came out for their first game of the year tonight were treated to what had to be the nightmare scenario for Bucks’ management, a closing seconds lost after a couple close calls. One has to assume it would have be better for future sales had the Bucks been blown out by 20, but Brandon Jennings matched Kobe basket-for-basket.
The complaining about the refs and the NBA playing favorites on Twitter are pale compared to the choice words I heard on my way out of the stadium tonight. Fans vowing never to come back, and asking themselves why they paid attention to the NBA at all this year seemed to be everywhere to be found. This depressed attitude amplified by the fact that they live in a city where it’s a Wednesday night with a temperature below 20 degrees, nearing the end of a Christmas shopping season where more people than ever in my lifetime don’t have the financial wherewithal to buy something for their loved ones.
And it’s a shame that there is a good chance they won’t come back. Now more than any season since Andrew Bogut was drafted, the Bucks are holding up their end of the bargain. Night-after-night they’re playing hard, looking more and more like a complete team, and giving fans a reason to come to the Bradley Center. In a city that can’t seem to get its act together around schools, transit, or jobs, the Bucks are finally providing a welcome escape. In a city that’s bitterly cold every winter, the Bucks are providing a welcome distraction.
It would be a shame for the casual fan to miss this year’s Bucks team because of a bad call. The game surely wasn’t officiated at a level that is the pinnacle of the profession, but it’s certainly not the world Tim Donaghy says it is.
December 15th, 2009 by Jeramey Jannene · 1 Comment
Michael Redd, formerly the biggest star on the Milwaukee Bucks before some kid from Compton showed up, is finally back on the court. It’s been quite the journey with Redd the past three years, watching him be limited by injuries to an average of 52 games each of the past three years. Hopefully, for his knee’s sake, he never dunks the ball again. Despite cries from fans to trade him and his large contract, there are plenty of reasons to be excited that #22 is back on the court.
Complete scorer. Michael Redd is more than just a perimeter jump shooter, he is a complete scorer. He gets inside and scores efficiently. I bet you didn’t know he attempted the same percentage of inside shots as head-down-drive-and-throw-it-up Lebron James did last season. Redd shot a better effective field-goal percentage from inside and got his shot blocked less than King James while doing so too. Michael Redd is a complete scorer, a team will always have a need a player that can score at will.
Scoring droughts. Think back to some of the Bucks tough losses. The ESPN game in Oklahoma City where the team couldn’t score in the third quarter. The trouncing at home where the team went 11 minutes without scoring. Michael Redd can score in more ways than one, when his jumper isn’t going, he can take the ball inside to either find a good shot or get fouled. As much as I love Ersan Illyasova and Carlos Delfino, they can’t be relied on to do that when the team needs them. Redd has the tools to make scoring droughts much shorter.
The corner three. It’s one of the most efficient places to score from on the court. If Brandon Jennings and Andrew Bogut continue to run the pick and roll with success, the Bucks are going to want Michael Redd hanging out in the corner ready to shoot open shots as his man runs to double the player cutting to the basket with the ball. If I had to pick any player from the Bucks roster to knock down an open corner three to save my life, I’m picking Redd. With Redd having less pressure to create on his own shot with Jennings in the backcourt, the chances of Michael breaking his own record of 8 three-pointers in a quarter are higher than they ever were with TJ Ford, Mo Williams or Ramon Sessions at the helm. If Redd’s man doesn’t leave him to help guard the cutter, it’s likely the man guarding Delfino or Illyasova will. An open three for Delfino or Illyasova is good news for the Bucks as well. The Bucks are simply a more potent team from three with Redd on the court.
Replacement value. When Michael Redd is out it means more minutes for Charlie Bell. I like Charlie Bell as a player, but only in small doses. Forcing him to log extensive minutes is not in the Bucks or Bell’s long-term interests, as illustrated no more clearly than Skiles recent benching of Bell after his minutes had increased with Redd out. While Bell looked good for a stretch, things definitely appeared to be a downward trend, perhaps towards the abysmal shooting percentage he had during the 2007-2008 campaign (he ended up shooting 38.1%, he’s at 38.7% this year). More minutes for Redd results in fewer minutes for Bell, which should translate into better shot selection, more energy, and Flintstone being a better asset to the Bucks. All of this of course also results in less playing time for potential future-Michael-Redd Jodie Meeks, who despite being regarded as a shooter is only shooting 34.1% this year. Less Jodie Meeks is probably a good thing in the short-run, Redd himself became a star after riding the bench behind recent inductee into the 20,000 point club, Ray Allen.
Pressure. Brandon Jennings has looked decently poised at the end of games when he has it going. Andrew Bogut has shown significant improvement overall offensive improvement this year. They’ve both had stretches where they have played poorly too. Throwing Michael Redd into the mix minimizes the pressure on them to perform at at a high-level on the offensive end every night for the Bucks to have a shot to win. Also, when the Bucks lose, Redd’s presence will deflect attention from Jennings, giving him room to grow as a player and person.
We were treated to flashes of this working to perfection in the recent Portland 2/OT win. Redd hit some open shots. Defenders stayed home on him, giving Jennings more room to work with on his way to the basket. Charlie Bell wasn’t on the court in crunch time. Jodie Meeks looked good in a suit with Francisco Elson. The team as a whole didn’t force as many bad shots. Redd didn’t have to have the ball in his hands to affect the game.
It also went poorly at times, with flashes of Redd of old, jacking up a contested three off a pass from Jennings early in the shot clock after having made an open three just a moment earlier. It’ll take time for Michael Redd to adjust to his new role where he doesn’t have to be the man every time down the court, but when he figures it out, and he will, the Bucks are going to be a significantly better team.
December 14th, 2009 by Jeramey Jannene · 1 Comment
Squad 6, Andrew Bogut’s super-duper awesome cheering section, is easily the most exciting thing at the Bradley Center this year not wearing a jersey. Most of us will never get the chance to cheer amongst the “soldiers” (as they’re calling themselves), but hopefully you’re cheering with them. Thankfully one of them took a video to get a sense of what it is like in between the third and fourth quarters when they dance along to M@D’s – The Concert, which heavily samples The White Stripes – Seven Nation Army.
That said, getting mocked by this year’s rookie after being the subject of much mockery last year can’t be much fun. Joe also appears to have a thing for getting photographed sleeping.
December 2nd, 2009 by Jeramey Jannene · 2 Comments
With the exception of Brandon Jennings and the return of Andrew Bogut, Bogut’s Squad 6 has been the best addition to the Milwaukee Bucks this year. A loud, unruly group of fans that come out to each and every home game to turn the Bradley Center into a much more enjoyable place to watch basketball. Fox 6 stopped by recently to interview them.
ESPN is reporting that Ramon Sessions has agreed to a 4 year, $16 million deal with Minnesota, a deal that the Bucks are almost certain not to match as it would put them over the luxury tax this year.
It’s tough for the Bucks to lose Sessions, but I’m not altogether unconvinced that it wasn’t part of the master plan all along. I never thought Scott Skiles thought much of Sessions’ game, considering he only managed to average 27.5 minutes per game despite being the only player who could handle the ball and get into the lane for much of the season. Maybe Skiles felt Sessions freelanced too much on offense, maybe his defense was lacking. Either way, I got the feeling that Skiles would prefer a different guy to handle the ball. I’m sure the Bucks were hoping to work out a sign-and-trade rather than lose him for nothing, but keeping him wasn’t part of the plan, especially with Ridnour under contract for one year and then the reins obviously about to be passed to Brandon Jennings.
But Minnesota … what are they thinking?
The TWolves have been lambasted for the way the whole Ricky Rubio situation has come down, but I feel they did the right thing in the process. They refused to be bullied with the whole “small market” thing and drafted a good plan B in Jonny Flynn. If I was David Kahn, I would say this to the media: “My goal is to win an NBA Championship. I feel Ricky Rubio will be one of the best players in the world in a few years, and I managed to ensure that he will either be playing for us or will not be playing against us.” Enough said. There is still a chance that they could lose Rubio if he plays three years overseas, but who knows what rules will be built into the next collective bargaining agreement. He could be their property in perpetuity.
But it still means that Jonny Flynn is their point guard of the future. So why sign a guy who you want to be a backup (Sessions) for more money than Flynn will make over the lifetime of his rookie contract?
I fully understand that rookie point guards almost never succeed. All great point guards, besides Chris Paul, need at least a year (and sometimes 4 or 5) to blossom. They should have signed a veteran point guard (Juan Dixon, Steven Hart or Tyron Lue) to a 1-year deal, because once Flynn steps in as the #1 guy in a year he doesn’t need to be looking over his shoulder at Sessions.
The most the Knicks can offer Sessions in the first year of his contract would be equal to the midlevel exception, meaning that no matter what the offer is the Bucks can match it. However, with the Knicks set to drop under the salary cap next year, they could theoretically offer Sessions a deal with enough of a balloon payment in successive years as to cost the Bucks all of the cap space they are currently projected to gather next year. Not to mention, the Bucks would be unlikely to match any offer for Sessions that runs longer than two years, since by then they need Brandon Jennings to have taken the reins.
The bottom line is that we had better be ready to say goodbye to Sessions — there just isn’t much reason to expect the Bucks to bring him back at this point. With the cap dropping this year, and likely to drop even further next year (assuming there isn’t a season-killing lockout instead), the Bucks’ payroll right now is too large for what this season is going to turn out to be — a year long audition for guys to surround Bogut in 2011.
Meanwhile, word is the Bucks are pursuing Hakim Warrick. After losing Sessions and buying out Bruce Bowen, they will have a little money to use below the luxury tax, and I guess it is a good sign that Herb Kohl is letting Hammond use it. I don’t have any problems with Warrick — he’s turned himself into a much better shooter than he was when he entered the league and he’s still a spectacular athlete. They need an experienced, athletic component in the frontcourt, and for $2.5-$4 million he would be an adequate addition. Cleveland is supposed to be in the mix for him, but is limited to the $2 million biannual exception, so the Bucks would be able to offer more money.
But seeing this pursuit makes me wonder about John Hammond. Specifically, what was he thinking on draft night, 2008?
This offseason has seen the Bucks add Amir Johnson and (potentially) Walter Sharpe, two long, thin eye-poppingly athletic players who Hammond likely had a lot to do with their being drafted by the Pistons in the first place. Now he is pursuing Warrick. Clearly, Hammond likes these types of players. he wants to grab a bunch of “next generation” type of athletes — the sort of guy who is big, fast, and coordinated and could develop into a sort of multi-threat “point power forward”. Basically, he’s looking for someone to blossom into the next Kevin Garnett. Nothing wrong with that strategy.
So why would he have taken Joe Alexander over Anthony Randolph last year, especially the day after acquiring Richard Jefferson?
It’s not like Randolph was that much of a stretch — I had him ranked as the #5 prospect last year (behind Beasley, Rose, Love and Richard Hendrix — who I still maintain should have gotten a chance somewhere. He is about to sign a contract in Spain). Randolph fits Hammond’s style perfectly. He’s a great, raw athlete whose pretty good numbers at LSU would have been fantastic had he only been a better shooter at age 18. Now it’s looking like he’s a potential superstar, assuming Don Nelson ever lets him off the bench.
So in all of these efforts to find the poor man’s KG, Hammond might have passed on one last year. For Joe Alexander, who is 3 years older than Randolph, and for all the talk of his shooting ability, had the exact same FG% as Randolph their final year in college. That’s why I had Randolph ranked as the #5 prospect and Alexander as #27.
Looking for some great horse racebooks? Try Sportsbetting3.com's online horse betting sites where you'll find a wealth of information. For general sports betting info, SB3 offers football, basketball, baseball, and hockey coverage. Like Roulette or Craps? Try USA friendly Rushmore Casino, one of the web's best.
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute is the silent assassin on the Bucks. He typically has to defend the best offensive player on the other team, be it Dirk Nowitzki or Kevin Durant. As a reward for his hard work, Mbah a Moute never gets a single play called for him. So how does he post a career average of seven points a game? The offensive glass. Despite being undersized as a starting power forward, Luc Richard yanks down over two offensive rebounds a game. Those rebounds usually go straight back up and result in two points for the good guys.
