The Bratwurst - Milwaukee Bucks Blog

I am pleased to announce that I have made an upgrade to my IPM rankings — thanks to the geniuses at www.82games.com, they kept track of charges this season and so I was able to add them into the ranking. I’ve been waiting for this. The rankings don’t change much (Andrew Bogut gets a little boost), but I still feel it helps with accuracy a bit. The rankings are available here.

But the real improvement is that I have added a defensive component to IPM, making this ranking truly unique — not only does it include charges, but also defense. I’m mighty proud of it.

The idea for a defensive ranking came from this article by Jon Nichols at 82games.com. His method — called Defensive Composite Score — ranked players by three categories, summed the rankings, and then ranked them by percentage to come up with a 0-100 ranking. His categories were athleticism ratio (if you are familiar with my draft preview, I also used it there. It is blocks+steals/fouls), Dean Oliver’s Defensive Rating (a single number developed and described in the book Basketball on Paper) and on court/off court differential.

I took Nichols’ DCS, tweaked it and took it a step further. First, I added charges to the athleticism ratio (blocks+steals+offensive fouls drawn/fouls committed). After getting the individual ratings, I took my team defensive IPM score in order to add a “team adjustment” to each individual. Then I adjusted for how much each player was responsible for their teams’ defensive IPM, by backing out each player to determine how much better or worse each team would be had he not been on the team. Finally (and I wish I didn’t have to do this, but the data demanded it) I inputted a position adjustment to reflect the fact that big men have much more difficult demands on their defense.

I absolutely hate position adjustments, and feel that if you have to use them then there is a flaw in your methodology because you can then just change a players’ ranking by changing their position — even though they don’t always play the same position. It’s a major flaw that also crops up in the “Wages of Wins” school of thought, but that’s a whole other story.

Anyway, I then had an adjusted score that I could convert to IPM, and by combining IPM with the Defensive IPM I obtained a final, all-around ranking. Because the rules of basketball are slanted toward offense I weighted the combined rankings as 75% IPM and 25% defensive IPM. Basically, I figured that since a 25 ppg scorer would likely score 35 points against the worst defender but about 20 against the best defender, you can’t truly assume the two systems are equal. A great defensive player will still allow enough scoring that he has to at least be able to pick up a little slack at the offensive end.

The ranking are available here.

What does the defensive ranking component tell us?

The most interesting thing is that it says that in the case of top players, they usually bring the goods at both ends of the floor. It makes some sense — logically great players like LeBron, KG and Kobe are so superior athletically that they can dominate at both ends. So the players who don’t have their overall rankings changed very much when defensive IPM is included tend to be the best players (or, like Matt Carroll, they just suck at both offense and defense).

What was also interesting was looking at the players who had their rankings changed the most by adding defensive IPM. It clearly shows that there are some “winning”, “intangible” skills that some players bring and that some lack.

It doesn’t come as much surprise that the players who had their rankings improved the most were the known offensively-challenged defensive specialists: Shane Battier, Ben Wallace, and Anderson Varejao types. But what was interesting was that of the 40 players who had their rankings improved by the most (among those who averaged 20 mpg), 30 of them made the playoffs this season. At the other end of the spectrum, among the 40 20mpg+ offensive specialists who were hurt the most by incorporating defensive rankings (Eddy Curry, Ben Gordon, Hakim Warrick …. Charlie Villanueva) 30 of them missed the playoffs. Coincidence? I think not.

What does this ranking system tell us about some of the Bucks?

Charlie Villanueva must go. While Charlie V’s offensive IPM was decent (0.7756, #116 overall) his team-worst 0.508 defensive IPM dropped his overall ranking 58 spots to #176. Quite simply, Villanueva is a pretty average offensive player who doesn’t defend well enough to make him a net-positive player.

Michael Redd should stay. Redd suffered through an awful offensive season by his standards and had a pretty lousy defensive IPM to boot, but when it was all said and done his overall ranking dropped by 19 spots. However, Redd is good enough offensively to score 25 a night and get to the line 10 times, while attempting to replace him would likely lead to a replacement who is moderately better defensively but much, much worse offensively. And Redd is likely to be better on offense next season.

Mo Williams should go. Mo’s 0.625 defensive IPM lowered his overall ranking by 25 spots, which pretty much negates all of the strides his offensive game has made. Added to that is the way Mo’s decision making seems to make the game harder on his teammates, and he winds up looking like a real drag on the team.

Andrew Bogut should sign that extension. When charges were added, Bogut’s IPM rose to 0.910, which is borderline-all-star level. At his age, there is still plenty of time for Bogut to mature into a solid contributor for a good team. Bogut’s defense was also the best on the team, which suggests that once Scott Skiles beats some defensive responsibility into his teammates, he should be able to become the centerpiece of a pretty good defense.

Yi was … good defensively? I don’t know about this one. Yi’s defensive IPM was pretty good, but I think that Yi gets a big assist from Bogut here. Bogut would always guard the oppositions’ best big, and Yi’s on/off court differential looks a little better than it is because he got hurt a little before the team really cratered. Yi has a lot of work to do next year — and he owes it to Bogut for making his numbers look good this season.

Thank God Royal Ivey is gone. Having a defensive specialist can be a good strategy. However, Ivey was so bad offensively that even great defense couldn’t make him a net-positive player. But Ivey, despite maybe looking good here and there, was lousy defensively as well — his 0.523 DefIPM was the second worst on the team. Charlie Bell’s DefIPM was awful as well, but he gets a pass because he was thrown to the wolves at small forward way too often. How can a 6′3″ player be expected to guard LeBron James straight up?

Ramon Sessions isn’t as good as the numbers say. While Sessions had the best offensive and defensive IPM on the team, don’t forget that his 17 games played amounted to 450 minutes of extended garbage time. Nobody was very serious about guarding him and there wasn’t much incentive for him to play much defense beyond gambling for steals. He’ll be a good backup, but he’s not nearly as good as the numbers think.

And there’s my two cents for John Hammond.

Now that this season is finally over, it is time to recap the contributions of each player. I’m not a big fan of giving letter grades, especially since when you consider that the Bucks’ record this season was actually worse than last years’ injury-marred one, everybody associated with this team pretty much deserves an “F-“. Except for my season ticket rep, Nick. He has been great this season, always accommodating and helpful.

So I’ve decided to grade each player on how responsible they were for Larry Krystkowiak getting fired.

I’m going to review each player over the course of the next several days in reverse order of their salary, and also am giving their final IPM (data for all players available here). As you may know, typically an IPM greater than 0.9 is borderline all-star level, over 0.8 is that of a solid starter, above 0.7 is a useful player, and below 0.6 means you were probably hurting the team more than helping it. Also, because it is a per-minute measurement, it becomes much more accurate the more minutes you play – so take Ramon Session’s ranking with a grain of salt. He’s not really the 33rd best player in the NBA.

Ramon Sessions ($427K, 0.931 IPM): Thank you Larry Harris for this wonderful parting gift. Sessions was the lone bright spot of the end of the season, as he provided a boost with his pass-first game and eye popping statistics, highlighted by 127 assists vs. only 36 turnovers. The knee-jerk reaction is to jettison Mo Williams and turn the point guard spot over to Sessions, but let’s not get too excited just yet.

The red flag about Sessions is that his impressive play ran counter to his career style. In college and the NBDL, Sessions was a ball-dominating scorer who was hard to keep off of the free throw line, but once coming to the NBA he concentrated on passing first and shooting second. The results, when accompanied by some less-than-intense defense on the part of the Bucks’ opponents, were some excellent box scores (45 points, 38 assists, 15 rebounds and 5 turnovers on 18-29 shooting in the final two games). One has to wonder what will happen next season when he plays against teams that actually want to play defense against him.

The only reason for the Bucks to go into next season with Sessions as the starter is if they win the draft lottery and take Derrick Rose, but Sessions will clearly be a valuable reserve next season. Just think – a bench player who can actually create an offensive set and draw a foul once in a while!

Responsibility for Coach K’s dismissal: 0%

David Noel ($687K): Lost for the season to a shoulder injury, we will never get to see what Noel might have brought to the table this season. With the signing of Awvee Storey, Noel would most likely have been in the D-League or wearing a suit on the bench all season, anyway.

Responsibility for Coach K’s dismissal: 0%

Awvee Storey ($770K, 0.647 IPM): I can only see one reason why Storey was given a guaranteed contract in the first place: because Storey’s agent Mark Bartlestein is Mo Williams’ agent as well, and by helping out another client Larry Harris was trying to enlist Bartelstein to persuade Mo to stay in Milwaukee rather than head for Miami. How’d that one work out, Larry?

After an embarrassing 2006-07 season which saw Storey kicked out of the D-League for putting a teammate into a coma (and then breaking an opposing players’ rib while boxing him out in a German League game) it was amazing that Storey simply wasn’t blackballed out of the league in the first place.

The signing sort of made some sense at the time – Storey was veteran insurance in case Bobby Simmons couldn’t go after missing the previous season and/or the Desmond Mason signing turned out to be a bust (which it would have been had Mason played as poorly as he did with the Hornets). But why, then, give Storey a guaranteed contract? By the time his deal would have to be picked up the Bucks would have known what they had in their top two small forwards. They could have then released Storey before his contract became guaranteed and had an open roster spot to audition young players who may have been worth a shot (such as Nick Fazekas, the Mavericks second round pick who became Sessions’ top running mate for the NBDL’s Tulsa 66ers. Fazekas was released by the Mavs, signed by the Clippers, and would put up a 0.88 IPM in 26 games for them). Oh yes, he was given a guaranteed contract because of his agent.

But it seems that Krystkowiak couldn’t stand Storey’s game anyway. After Desmond Mason got hurt and Simmons simply sucked, instead of inserting Storey into the rotation Coach K continued to trot out Charlie Bell and Michael Redd at the small forward position. Storey wound up only seeing action in 26 games, with 90% of that coming after the season was long lost.

Probably the most pathetic thing is that Storey finished the season with the Bucks’ 6th best IPM, behind only Sessions, Bogut, Williams, Redd and Villanueva. The guy doesn’t even belong in the league and he was their best per-minute bench player this season!

Responsibility for Coach K’s dismissal: 0%

Royal Ivey ($798K, 0.548 IPM): Iveys’ reputation as a great defender sure got him a lot of playing time this season, and what a waste that was. Ivey must have really shut down Dee Brown and Scoonie Penn in his Bucks tryout, because despite all evidence to the contrary, Coach K kept on using Ivey as his “defensive stopper.�

There were two problems with that strategy – even if Ivey’s defense was absolutely awesome, there was no way it would make up for his own putrid offense (he actually finished with the lowest IPM on the team). However, there is no evidence whatsoever that Ivey’s defense was any good, either. According to 82games.com, the production of the player that Ivey was guarding averaged out to double that of what Ivey produced himself.

I don’t understand how any team could expect to win more than about 26 games if they are giving Royal Ivey 20 minutes a night. Yet, Coach K kept going back to him, probably because his “energy in practice� and “defensive intensity� (meaning: he looks really disappointed in himself when he gets beat) were there.

Responsibility for Coach K’s dismissal: 12%

Michael Ruffin ($1.0M, 0.610 IPM): I really liked the idea of signing Ruffin, because I felt that a team with so much offensive talent on it could use a defensive banger like him. Ruffin is the most inept offensive player in NBA history, but has carved out a nice niche for himself as a guy who comes in, throws his body around, gives some hard fouls, grabs some boards and stays out of the way of the talented players. He’s useful.

The Bucks even played a little better with him on the floor than off, being outscored by 8.4 points per game without him but only 2.2 ppg with him. Ruffin did his job. He won’t help you win, but he doesn’t help you lose, and he makes it all look pretty ugly.

Ruffin, however, was the centerpiece of the Play That Probably Sealed Larry Krystkowiak’s Fate As Bucks Coach. After blowing a 17 point third quarter lead to the New York Knicks, and with the Bucks trailing by one with three seconds remaining, Krystkowiak inexplicably left Ruffin in the game for the final play. Even Isiah Thomas realized this and started coaching long enough to tell the Knicks defense to leave Ruffin open in order to deny everyone else the ball. Ruffin was then left to miss a 6-foot finger roll at the buzzer.

Michael Ruffin has scored 4.2 points per 36 minutes in his nine year NBA career, and Larry Krystkowiak put him into a position to take the final shot in a game. And now Krystkowiak is looking for a new job. Need I say more?

Responsibility for Coach K’s dismissal: 3%

Next up: The mysteries known as Charlie V, Jake V, and Yi.

How in the world can you blow a 17 point lead with 14 minutes remaining?

First of all, I don’t care that Mo Williams was out. Everybody has to deal with losing starters, and the Knicks were also playing without Nate Robinson (as well as the addition-by-subtraction loss of Stephon Marbury).

Isiah Thomas even threw in the towel in the third quarter — after the Bucks extended their lead to 81-64, Thomas brought in Malik Rose and Renaldo Balkman, to go with David Lee, Jamal Crawford and Fred Jones, and didn’t make a single substitution for the rest of the game! He stopped coaching for 10 minutes (basically just telling his guys; “just do whatever you want and see what happens”), not calling a timeout until the Knicks had made a game of it at 93-86.

The “Wages of Wins” believers will try to say that David Lee was the reason the Knicks came back and won the game, but Lee didn’t really do anything out of the ordinary. His 8-12 shooting and 9 rebounds (4 offensive) looks great, but that’s just typical sneaky David Lee stuff — he shoots 55% anyway, so a 7-12 game would be average for him, and in his normal 32 minute outing he averages 10 boards (3 offensive). So he had a pretty typical game for hin — just your standard, underrated scrappy stuff that has carried the Knicks a 13-36 record against teams other than the Bucks this season.

Jamal Crawford was on fire, making all sorts of crazy stuff on his way to 30 points. That can happen with Crawford — he’s an average player overall but he either looks like a world-beater or the worst player in the league on any given night. The Knicks had good Jamal on Saturday, and their record is pretty respectable when he springs for 28+ points. This is a perfect example of how using a player “because he’s a good defender” is stupid. Crawford was making everything, and there really wasn’t much Ivey could do (within the rules, anyway) to stop him. Guys like Crawford will get hot sometimes and that’s life. So Ivey couldn’t do anything to stop Crawford early, and by shooting 2-9 and scoring 4 points, Ivey didn’t help out offensively as well. So Crawford isn’t really the reason the Knicks won the game — he helped, but even with him putting up big numbers this game was winnable.

No, it comes down to coaching. Larry Krystkowiak, I have a few questions for you. Specifically:

When you have a 17 point lead, why would you wait until the Knicks have run off 15 unanswered points before calling a timeout? I can see the logic that Krystkowiak wanted to let the quarter run out and then things got out of hand, but this is the second time this season that the Bucks have blown a big 3rd quarter lead to the Knicks. After they got two or three consecutive baskets, why would you not call timeout to break the Knicks’ rhythm and remind the guys that the Bucks have been in this situation against New York before?

How does Charlie Villanueva get one shot in the fourth quarter? He shot 10-22 for the game and didn’t see the ball in seven minutes of work in the fourth. He shot 6-12 and grabbed 6 rebounds in the third quarter. Is anyone calling plays here? Did anyone realize that the Knicks went small, were using a 6′7″ and 6′9″ frontcourt, and Isiah wasn’t bothering with substitutes?

How does Bogut get two shots in the fourth quarter? He made one and then got called for his sixth foul on the second. Once again, he was being guarded by 6′7 Malik Rose.

Why would you not go big with Gadzuric in the fourth quarter? Krytkowiak used Gadzuric at power forward a little against Dallas and it worked quite well. The Knicks were charging back into the game with their small lineup so why wouldn’t you try to force the Knicks out of it? Get Ivey out of the game, let Bell play point guard, and move Villanueva to small forward so that Redd will be guarded by Crawford instead of Balkman. Then Gadzuric’s athleticism can at least try to match Lee’s, Villanueva has a big height advantage over Balkman, and Redd gets to pick on the worst defender in the league.

Why in the world was Michael Ruffin in the game on the final posession? Michael Ruffin is the WORST OFFENSIVE PLAYER IN THE HISTORY OF THE NBA! In a nine year career he has averaged 4.2 points per 36 minutes. He is a nice enough player, and his strengths in other areas makes up for his lack of scoring. But you cannot have him in the game in a situation where you have to get a basket.

I’m no NBA coach, but I know for certain that if I was in Isiah Thomas’ shoes drawing up my defense for the final play I’m doubling Redd hard with Ruffin’s man (Lee or Rose) and hoping to force the ball into Ruffin or Ivey’s (2-9 shooting) hands. Wouldn’t you know that’s exactly what Isiah did — when the Bucks first ran their inbounds play, Redd was doubled as soon as he caught the inbounds pass and fouled (the Knicks had a foul to give). As Redd was fouled, he passed the ball to Ivey, who would have had an open 20-footer for the win (which would have been option #2 on the list of “likely good outcomes for the Knicks”). Instead, the Knicks denied Redd the ball on the second try, leaving Bell with multiple defenders running at him and no choice but to dump it off to an open Ruffin (#1 on the list of “likely good outcomes for the Knicks”). Incredibly, the Knicks were able to double team two guys on the final play, because the Bucks were using two players (Ivey and Ruffin) that Isiah didn’t mind being open.

You needed a shot from a decent scorer. Why wasn’t Yi in for Ruffin? If it was me, I’d have had Simmons inbounding instead of Ivey, but that’s nitpicking — it’s not like Simmons was any good last night, either. But Michael Ruffin? Michael Ruffin. In a situation where he might take the last shot. Michael Ruffin. He’s 6′8. He’s taken 19 shots this season. When you have a 7-foot shooter on your bench. Really. Michael Ruffin.

Well, anyhow, another day another loss. This was on the list of “games the Bucks need to win if they are going to make the playoffs”, so one more bad loss and they need to start beating good teams to make up ground. The door is closing. If they lose Monday to the Clippers, then it will slam shut.

I watched most of the Bucks-Grizzlies games simply feeling bad for just about everyone involved in the game. There must have been 800 fans in the building at tipoff because of the weather. Bogut started out getting schooled by Darko Milicic of all people. Mike Miller was getting open jumpers whenever he wanted. The game even marked the arrival of the Kwame Brown “I just don’t really care all that much” tour to Memphis (great line by Jon McGlocklin when Brown was called for a foul on Gadzuric despite not coming within about a foot of him: “Brown didn’t even say a word! He just sort of shrugged his shoulders like, ‘okay’.”)Krystkowiak even started Bell and Ivey (giving up a total of 10 inches to Mike Miller and Rudy Gay), but I can’t complain about it because he didn’t have a choice.

Without Yi available, then Simmons had to play backup power forward (no word on why Voskuhl and Michael Ruffin are now apparently benched). So with Mason only in his second game back then Bell had to start at small forward, and without Redd that leaves only two more guards on the active roster. Is Harris planning on doing anything about this thin backcourt? I can’t wait for Mo to need to take a game off to rest his injured thumb (which will need surgery after the season). Then does Bell and Ivey play 48 minutes each?

Lets just say that this game didn’t give me much confidence in my playoff prediction. Thank you Mo for the personal 10-0 run to seal the game.

Meanwhile, can we finally put to bed the myth of Royal Ivey as a good defensive player?

Mike Miller went for 32 points (14 above his average) on 12-21 shooting. Especially in the first half he was able to get wide open looks almost whenever he wanted, ostensibly while on Ivey’s watch. The only thing that stopped him all night was getting clubbed in the face a couple of times by Villanueva.

Of course, Ivey has a reputation as a good defender and he must always bring the energy in practice, because he sure does play a lot. However, as I wrote a couple of weeks ago, I’m convinced that in order to get a good defensive reputation all you have to do is look good in your defensive stance and look annoyed when you get beat. Since the rules of basketball are slanted toward the offensive player, it is very difficult to actually judge just how “good” a defender someone is. I think that there are generally two types of great defensive players — people with the “whole package” (elite athletes with size/strength advantages who bring the effort all the time) and cheap shot artists (who make up for their lack of athleticism with a lack of morality). Just because a guy tries to fight through screens doesn’t make him a good defender — just someone who tries hard. In reality, though, a good defender is someone who holds his opponent to less production than he himself produces offensively. Talent always wins out in basketball — if you aren’t big, strong or fast enough that will get exploited, no matter how hard you try (although lack of effort will get exploited, too. Just ask Kwame Brown).

The trouble is that Ivey is nowhere near an average offensive player, so even if he could hold the people he defends to average production then he would still be a net-negative player.

The myth of Ivey’s defense is borne out in the stats, thanks to 82games.com. Ivey has played 37% of the time and the Bucks have been outscored by 11.1 points per 48 minutes with him on the court and by 5.3 pp/48 without him. They rebound slightly better without him, committ one more foul/48 with him and draw one fewer foul/48 without him.

82games.com also breaks down each players’ performance by the position they are playing, as well as the performance of their counterparts while in the game. The story is told by PER (Player Efficiency Rating — very similar to IPM). An average player will have a PER of 15, while a 20 PER is close to all-star level. Ivey is a poor offensive player (PER of 11.9 at point guard and 11.2 at shooting guard) while he turns the people he defends into studs (opposing point guards have a 22.3 PER against him and shooting guards run up a 19.4). On average he scores 14 points per 48 minutes and the guys he guards score 23.

Of course, with the thin backcourt it is all a moot point — Ivey has to play. But this just shows what a mistake it is to add a player to a team because his lack of offense makes you believe his defense is good.

And, while I’m bringing up statistics and love to go on and on about how Charlie Villanueva should play more, I just wanted to point out one more thing:

Yi Jianlian: 48 starts, 1 double-double
Desmond Mason: 25 starts, 1 double-double
Bobby Simmons: 20 starts, no double-doubles
Charlie Villanueva: 1 start, 2 double-doubles

Just saying.

All in all, while it was a truly uninspiring win against Memphis, it was a win. Considering that the Bucks were down three starters (and only had one should-be starter to plug in) they deserve some credit for withstanding the Grizzlies’ early run and hanging around until the end.

Now it’s off to Dallas, where a blowout loss wont really matter much. At least they split the road trip.

Let’s be honest.

But on the bright side, my son learned to crawl last week. And I’ve updated IPM.

The Bucks have five games this week, and if they don’t make a move right now then the playoffs will be pretty much an impossibility. At 8 games under .500 with 40 games down, they will have to go about 25-17 the rest of the way to get into the postseason. But if they struggle to a 1-4 record this week? Then they would need a 24-13 finish. Considering they have played like a 30 win team to this point of the season, only the biggest optimist could envision an extended 11-over .500 run.

The schedule this week is a rough one, too — Monday at New Orleans (going on right now, but courtesy of Fox Sports Net, we get to see the International Fight League instead), and considering the Hornets are on fire and have the best guard in the NBA in Chris Paul it’s hard to see the Bucks’ mixed up backcourt containing them. Then it’s Phoenix on Tuesday. A home game to be sure, but a back-to-back against another top team.

The Bucks should beat Indiana .. should .. but then it’s a game in Toronto the next night. They finish off the stretch on Sunday with another crack at not embarrassing themselves at home against the Wizards.

That’s 4 games against what IPM says have been among the top ten teams in the league over the last 2 weeks. Let’s face it, 2-3 would be a good week. But that doesn’t help jump start a playoff run.

Now that Bobby Simmons is a question mark with a neck strain, the lineup has become thin enough that it’s hard to fill out a complete lineup. They now have no choice to either shoot themselves in the foot by using Michael Redd at small forward or try something unconventional. But as the Golden State game showed, Larry Krystkowiak isn’t going to do unconventional.

The Warriors game annoyed me to no end. We all know that Mo can’t stop anyone. We all know that Royal Ivey can’t offer enough offense to make up for his defense. We (or, at least anyone except Krystkowiak) know that Michael Redd can’t guard small forwards or score all that effectively when guarded by bigger, more athletic players. So HOW CAN REDD PLAY THE WHOLE GAME AT SMALL FORWARD AND IVEY PLAY 42 MINUTES WHILE VILLANUEVA AND BELL COMBINE FOR 35?

Bell’s game has come around enough that even if Ivey is a little better defensively, Bell more than makes up for it offensively. Playing Redd (24 points/3 rebounds/3 assists) at forward means that the 6′8″ Steven Jackson (12/3/8 in 25 minutes) can cancel him out.

So (broken record time) why not use Villanueva at small forward, so that Redd can move back to shooting guard and have a huge height advantage on Monta Ellis? The Williams/Redd backcourt might have caused enough problems for the Warriors defense that they would have needed to get Ellis out and move Jackson to the backcourt, which could have changed the whole game. The game was competitive in the first, second and fourth quarters — it was a six minute stretch of the third where Ellis absolutely shredded the Bucks defense that decided the game!

Another thing about that third quarter — the Bucks were down only one at the half, and started the third quarter allowing scores on the first two Golden State posessions while turning it over on their one posession. My friend who I had brought to the game, who is a pretty casual basketball fan and not a Bucks or Warriors fan, immediately said; “They need a timeout right now.” He was absolutely right. Why not call time out and try to stem the rush? Instead you risk letting the game get out of hand right there? Of course, Krystkowiak didn’t call timeout until after Redd turned it over and Harrington hit a 3 (9 point deficit in three posessions). Even more perplexing, Krystkowiak then didn’t make a single subsitiution in the third quarter until the 8:55 mark — right after a 7-0 Bucks run got the deficit back to 8. What gives?

Well, enough about the past. I think my feelings about Krystkowiak’s coaching style has been hashed out enough — it’s time to move on and watch this week with interest. Now is the time to make a move — a 3-2 stretch and the season is still alive. Otherwise it’s time to start doing draft previews.

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about 14 potential trades the Bucks could do, but that most likely wouldn’t happen. I’m going to try that exercise again.

I figure that everybody is fair game except for Bogut, Williams and Yi. Williams, as a newly resigned free agent, is almost impossible to trade; as a somewhat productive, moderately paid big man Bogut would be impossible to replace; and Yi is too important to the health of the franchise to let go.

It has become much more difficult to figure out semi-reasonable trades, as Simmons and Gadzuric have played so poorly that I can’t imagine anyone taking on their contracts. There is one exception, though – a title contender might be willing to take on Gadzuric as “an energetic big guy to crash the boards and use his fouls� but that’s about it.

Additionally, salary cap rules make it well nigh impossible to trade Charlie Bell this season. As a newly resigned free agent, he (and Mo) falls under base year compensation (BYC) rules. Basically, should he get traded then his outgoing salary would only count for half of his actual salary. This was instituted to prevent teams from overpaying guys simply to fit them into trades. The thing that makes it so prohibitive, though, is that if the Bucks traded away Bell for a player who made between $1.55 mil and $2.03 mil (half of Bell’s $3.1 times 125%+$100,000) then Bell’s return $3.1 million salary would mean the other team is taking back too much money. Therefore Bell can only be traded to a team who is at least $1.07 million under the cap, and nobody is. One other caveat – in the first year of a BYC contract, the player can refuse to be included in any trade.

There are two loopholes in the BYC rules that would make it possible to trade Bell. One would be if a team has a trade exception (generated when they make a trade in which they take back less salary than they gave). However, I’m not sure who has them except for Phoenix, and as a luxury tax payee they did the Kurt Thomas deal in order to obtain the exception so that they can save the money. So I’m not considering exceptions in any proposals, which means that there may be some attractive potential deals out there that I wouldn’t figure out. The other loophole is that I believe that Bell could be traded for another BYC player who makes a similar amount of money as he does.

One other thing that makes this much more difficult – ESPN’s Trade Machine isn’t working correctly. Somehow it thinks the Bucks are under the cap, so it accepts nearly any moronic trade you stick in there. Simmons and Gadzuric for Kevin Garnett and Rajon Rondo? Sure! Want a side order of Paul Pierce with that? So I’m just going by my own math and understanding of the salary cap here – there is a chance that I might propose a trade that couldn’t actually work. Sorry.

And on to the ideas:

Dan Gadzuric to Boston for Brian Scalabrine and Scot Pollard: Scalabrine is one of the only players in the NBA who is significantly worse than Gadzuric. He can’t score, can’t rebound, can’t pass, doesn’t play good defense … and yet he’s got 3 years/$10+ million left on his contract. Apparently he is a good teammate, though, and has a sort of cult “human victory cigar� following in Boston. Pollard has a one year contract and is a shade worse than Gadzuric in every area except for turnovers. The Bucks would save about $10 million and 1 year on this deal, and Gadzuric would be an occasionally useful 12th man for Boston. Is Boston willing to take on the extra salary in 2010 to make this trade happen? You never know when having Gadzuric to foul Duncan 5 times and grab a couple of boards in the finals might make the difference in a championship game. This is a fair trade. But Boston wouldn’t do it – there are a surprising number of “Scalabrine� jerseys walking around Beantown.

Royal Ivey to Cleveland for Shannon Brown: A sort of “why the heck not� proposal for both teams. The Cavs have soured on Brown, thinking they had drafted an eventual starter to run the floor with LeBron, but he’s turned out to be too small and not enough of a ball handler to start at either backcourt spot. Ivey’s defense would help them make a playoff run this season. With the Bucks, Brown might be able to back up both guard spots effectively in a sort of Charlie Bell role. Both contracts expire after this season, so it’s a low risk trade for both parties. Also one which wouldn’t have any effect on the W/L record.

Charlie Bell and Charlie Villanueva to Golden State for Mickael Pietrus, Patrick O’Bryant and a first round pick: The one trade that I can come up with that fits in with Bell – both he and Pietrus are BYC players so this trade would work. I can’t help but think that Villanueva would shine in Don Nelson’s system, and the only power forward he has is Al Harrington. While taking on a long contract like Bell would seem to be detrimental to them, it actually may not be because Monta Ellis is a free agent after this season and Baron Davis can opt-out. They could possibly lose one of those players (likely Ellis), and as Marco Belinelli hasn’t shown much, they might need Bell to come off the bench for the next few years. O’Bryant is a bust who is in the last year of his contract, but Pietrus would be an interesting addition to the Bucks. He’s going to be a free agent, so the Bucks would get Ruben Patterson-style maximum effort from him. He’d be an immediate starter for the next 6 weeks while Mason is out, and still would get almost 30 mpg backing up Mason and Redd the rest of the year. It’s a big improvement on the 19 mpg he’s currently getting and would allow him to showcase himself for his upcoming free agency. That’s an important incentive to get him in Milwaukee since both he and Bell would have to approve this trade. The Bucks would save a lot of money on this deal (or they resign Pietrus and hope that he fills the void at small forward) and clear a logjam at power forward, while the Warriors would get two useful players (provided they are confident that Bell will find his shot eventually).

Michael Redd and Michael Ruffin (or Jake Voskuhl) to Houston for Tracy McGrady: This one looks like the sort of deal that would be good for both teams but that neither one would actually do. Apparently McGrady has been making noise about not being happy in Houston (wow, when has he ever done that?). Rockets management might like the idea of trading him for a player who, while only being 80% the player McGrady is, at least isn’t perpetually questionable due to a trick back, and should be a much better running mate for Yao Ming. One has to worry about McGrady not wanting to be in Milwaukee and suddenly his back “acts up� almost every single night. When he’s on, though, he still can be one of the top 3 players in the game. Financially this would be a push for both teams, but the Bucks would save one year on McGrady’s contract. Neither team would do this because …. trades like this never happen. But it’s an interesting idea.

Charlie Villanueva and Dan Gadzuric to the Lakers for Kwame Brown: An outright salary dump by the Bucks as Brown’s contract expires this year, but Brown hasn’t offered anything to the Lakers in what has otherwise been an excellent season for them. I still think the idea of Odom and Villanueva on the same team is intriguing, and the growth of Andrew Bynum means they don’t lose much without Brown’s size. Much like the Boston proposal, Gadzuric could be a useful (albeit expensive) 12th man for a good team.

Charlie Villanueva to Memphis for Hakim Warrick and Kyle Lowry: As long as Memphis has Pau Gasol they will be searching for someone to play alongside him. A bruising big guy? A finesse power forward? We just don’t know any more! Meanwhile, Lowry doesn’t have a spot any more with the arrival of Mike Conley and Warrick has been squeezed down to 14 mpg. Another deal where the Bucks get two inexpensive players and have a couple of years to figure out exactly what they got, while Memphis tries the same with Charlie V. Lowry could probably be spun off in another deal for salary filler and a draft pick.

Charlie Villanueva and Royal Ivey to New Orleans for Julian Wright and Hilton Armstrong: The Hornets bench has really, really really sucked this year (but not destroyed the rest of the team like it has for a certain other city) and recent stories in the New Orleans Times-Picayune say that they are desperately seeking backup help for Chris Paul and David West. Armstrong is awful but inexpensive and Wright has a lot of potential but hasn’t seen the floor behind Peja Stojakovic and Morris Peterson. If the Hornets are serious about making noise in the playoffs this season this is a good deal for them, while Wright will likely be the best player involved in this trade 3 years down the road.

Charlie Villanueva and Desmond Mason to New York for Quentin Richardson and David Lee: Even Isiah Thomas can’t be so stupid as to not realize what he has in Lee … right? Lee is a rebounding, energy machine that is the sort of guy that keeps plays alive and doesn’t need the ball to succeed. He’s a winner on a team of losers. Should Yi be able to eventually move to small forward, Lee would be the perfect complement to Yi and Bogut. There are those who say he’s been the most underrated player in the game for a couple of years, but I don’t know how underrated you can be when you start for, are the leading scorer for, and MVP of the Rookie-Sophomore game at All-Star Weekend last season. Anyway, I include this proposal because … well … only Isiah Thomas might do it. Realistically, there’s no way it happens.

And there we go. Eight proposals, most of which are fairly realistic. It’s interesting how few decent bargaining chips the Bucks actually have, but it’s also interesting how difficult it is to figure out just who would help the Bucks. The Bucks need a small forward, that is clear. But all of their best bargaining chips have spent this season killing their trade value.

The chance that any of these trades will actually be consummated is approximately zero, but it’s an interesting exercise because it kind of highlights what the Bucks’ biggest problem is: it’s not the starters, it’s the bench. Specifically, the expensive members of the bench. Those guys simply don’t have much value.

I’ve been looking at recent IPM data (the latest updates of which have been posted), and the analysis shows some ways that the rotations can be changed to help get the Bucks out of this ridiculous slide. There are some things that Coach K can still try.

Here are my thoughts about the Bucks’ players with their IPM’s since December 8th (after the Seattle loss). Remember that an IPM above 1.0 indicates superstar level, above .9 would be about all-star level, .75 indicates a solid starter, .65 is a questionable starter/good reserve and below about .5 is where the player is no longer helping you by being on the floor.

Mo Williams, 0.9536: There isn’t anything bad that can be said about Mo’s play, as he has distributed the ball well along with shooting at a pretty high percentage. The true pessimist might wonder why Mo’s best numbers seem to coincide with him being on a bad team, but from watching him play it doesn’t seem like he’s firing for his own stats at the expense of the team – in the recent spate of blowouts he’s only started gunning away after the games were long lost (you know, mid-first quarter). Mo has been the best player on the team, and according to Charles Gardner, with Redd sidelined, Krystkowiak might be about to move him to shooting guard to give Ivey more time over Bell. I don’t know, this might cause as many defensive problems as it solves, but I guess it’s worth a shot. I’m not going to criticize Krystkowiak for trying something different.

Michael Redd, 0.8020: Redd has been playing at a very poor level (for him) ever since Mason got hurt. His shot selection became awful and the all-around play that highlighted the first 15 games of the season disappeared. I’m convinced that the move to small forward has caused this. He has been forced to play more physical players on defense, tiring him out for his offensive responsibilities. The result has been some awful shots (bizarre, flat-footed attempts that would get a high-schooler benched) and a marked decline in his free throw percentage – both signs that he must be too tired to play correctly. Of course, he can’t guard small forwards, anyway, so the position change has ruined all facets of his game. The whole reason the Bucks got Redd late in the second round was because GM’s felt he wasn’t athletic enough to play small forward. He’s proved them all right. Please, Coach K, when he comes back from the thigh bruise, find someone else to play the 3!

Dan Gadzuric, 0.7474: Danny G has only played 5 games in the last 13 and only gotten 8 minutes per, but the numbers suggest that maybe it’s time to start playing him a little more. The trick isn’t when to play him but where – I think he should play alongside Bogut. 10 minutes a game of Danny G at power forward could help everyone. For one thing, it would get the Bucks’ two best rebounders in the game together. It would give Bogut a reprieve from being hammered all night long by the oppositions’ most physical player (since the Bucks’ other power forwards all hang out on the perimeter). Gadzuric wouldn’t have the responsibility of touching the ball on offense (both reducing his turnovers and opening up more shots for everyone else) and he could just crash the boards and – since 10 minutes is the goal for him – hack away at will whenever he gets beat.

Yi Jianlian, 0.7352: The brightest spot from the last month has definitely been the play of Yi. He is adjusting to the physicality of the NBA, as his percentage of his inside-shots that get blocked has slowly started to come down (to a still-way-too-high 32% for the season, vs. 41% a month ago). The question is can he play the 3 – I don’t really think that’s going to work. He still gets the ball slapped out of his hands way too often (23 “ball handling� turnovers this season) and should he be guarded by smaller, more athletic players that will happen even more often. Also, moving him to the 3 takes away his shot-blocking ability. Maybe he can play there in bursts, but long-term, I don’t think his future is anywhere but power forward. Better improve on that rebounding, bud.

Charlie Villanueva, 0.7179: Time for today’s “Brett wants Charlie V to play the 3� moment. There are two big differences between moving Yi to the 3 vs. V. Villanueva is a much more accomplished ball handler and has the ability to dribble past smaller defenders and get into the lane. Villanueva is also not nearly the shot blocker that Yi is (8 this season? How is that possible? ) and so doesn’t have the value that Yi does being stationed inside. Villanueva at the 3 weakens the teams defense, no question, but brings plenty to the team by allowing Redd to stay in the backcourt and Simmons on the bench.

Andrew Bogut, 0.6944: I was very surprised to see Bogut’s IPM slide so much as I feel he’s actually played fairly well. I’m sure that the problem is he just has too much responsibility to handle every single bit of inside work for his team. It’s got to be exhausting after a while to guard the oppositions best big man, battle the oppositions two biggest players for boards, initiate the offense from the high post, shoot more now that Redd is hurt, and – oh yeah – how about making 55% from the floor while you are at it? No wonder he always looks so pissed on the court. Of course, some blame for his sagging numbers falls squarely on his own shoulders – whatever happed to his free throw form? He was a 70% free throw shooter in college and at one point had a 15-18 foot jump shot, but that is completely gone now. His form has slid to depths of a Shaq-style shotput toss from the free throw line, with the same on-the-way-up release he uses on a jump hook. It’s really ugly. Time to hire a shooting coach.

Desmond Mason, 0.6701: Mason played pretty well in the final 7 games before getting hurt, and with Simmons playing so poorly the Bucks miss him more than they ever thought they would.

Jake Voskuhl, 0.6485: One nice thing about the Gadzuric benching is that it’s pretty clear that Voskuhl can pretty much handle the 11 minute a night job as Bogut’s backup, freeing up Danny G for my master plan of moving him to power forward.

Royal Ivey, 0.5275: I’m not sure that starting him over Bell is much of an improvement, but what else can you do with this screwed up roster that only has four guards? Ivey started for most of the season in Atlanta in 05-06 but only played 13 mpg, compared to 15 now. Oh, by the way, Atlanta went 26-56 in 05-06.

Charlie Bell, 0.5068: You know, take away the putrid shooting (enough said about that) and Bell isn’t really playing all that bad. He gets some steals, has a solid A/TO ratio and rebounds pretty well for his size. However, no matter how well he plays, if he’s starting and playing 20+ minutes for you then you aren’t winning. His defensive effort is great, but that only takes you so far when you are routinely giving up 3-5 inches and 20-40 pounds. He just isn’t big enough to play more than a couple of minutes away from the point guard spot.

Bobby Simmons, 0.3743: He’s putting up Brian Scalabrine-type numbers but playing 20 minutes a game. It’s really getting ugly with Simmons. His shooting and turnover rates have been so poor that he’s hurting the team at both ends of the floor — the Bucks have basically been playing 4-on-6 with him on the court. It’s no coincidence that his only good game in the last month (vs. Miami) was the Bucks’ most recent win – it’s been too much for his teammates to have to overcome his play. I’ve said it so many times but I’ll say it again – something is wrong with him, and he shouldn’t be out there for more than 5-8 minutes a game until he gets it sorted out.

I remember seeing Dallas come into the BC about 4 years ago (when Don Nelson was still their coach). Nowitzki wasn’t at full strength, playing with some nagging injury (ankle, knee, back … something like that). But he was still their best player. Nelson had to get the ball in his hands while still minimizing his effort and keeping him away from contact. So ….

He ran the same damn play about 100 consecutive times. A pick & pop between Jason Terry and Nowitzki. On every single posession. For the entire game. If the Bucks defended it poorly it freed Nowitzki for an open jumper, and when the Bucks defended it well it got Terry into the lane where he could create for everyone else. It was ugly, boring, and quite effective.

Without Redd, the Bucks’ shorthanded offense should do the exact same thing with Williams and Yi. Simplify the offense, get the ball in the hands of their most talented players, and keeps the ball out of the hands of Simmons and Bell.

So there you have it — the rotations and the gameplan that I’d like to see.

I guess any NBA team would completely fall apart if they lose one key player (except San Antonio, apparently), and you would expect that to happen to the Bucks if they lost Redd or Bogut or Williams. But who would have guessed that Desmond Mason was the key to the whole house of cards?

I don’t blame Coach Krystkowiak for getting himself kicked out of the game against Chicago. The season is going down the tubes and it’s time for him to pull the “coach freak out” motivational ploy. He may have felt that the officiating had been bad in the 4th quarter, but I’m not so sure — in addition to the Ivey/Hinrich loose ball call (which the officials probably did blow), he was unhappy about a screen that Aaron Gray set on Ivey (which was hard but legal) and a call that went against Charlie Villanueva even though it appeared he was tripped by Nocioni (replays showed that Charlie V grabbed Nocioni’s jersey first). If Krystkowiak was going to flip out at the officials it should have come a couple of weeks ago in the 2OT loss to Cleveland, when the officials missed LeBron James stepping out of bounds twice at the end of the first overtime. But as a motivational ploy, it was necessary against Chicago.

However, this game was lost because of the rotations, not the officials. While I applaud Krystkowiak for getting away from the “two platoon” rotation strategy, he has not handled the loss of Mason properly.

I grant that he is pretty much being screwed over by Bobby Simmons, who has been absolutely useless. Obviously he can’t play more than 15 minutes, and even that leads you to hold your breath. Something is wrong with him, and it may have to do with the 3 game “personal leave” he took earlier in the month. He hasn’t been the same since, and one hopes it’s not because of a major or tragic personal issue.

I’ve written plenty that I can’t stand using Michael Redd at small forward, but in this situation it’s unavoidable at least a little. But his offense has fallen apart in the last 3 games, coinciding with the injury to Mason. Redd can’t handle the physicality of playing small forward, and doesn’t put enough defensive effort into it. So while 10 minutes a game at the “3″ is probably necessary right now, why not try to limit his time there?

Speaking of Redd, considering that Krystkowiak preaches that defensive effort determines playing time, at what point does spotlight start to shine on Redd? His defense may have cost the Bucks the game on Friday. After the controversial call that got Krystkowiak sent to the showers, the Bucks were only down two and forced a missed shot. But Luol Deng — Redd’s man — came in untouched and slammed home the rebound. How could Redd botch that play so badly? When the shot went up, Redd was standing 3 feet from the basket while Deng was 10 feet away on the baseline. Redd did not put any effort into boxing out, never turned toward Deng, and never even raised his hands above his waist to go after the rebound. He stood there like a spectator, watching his man flush the rebound home. All he had to do was look over his shoulder and box out 10 feet from the hoop and the result of that game might have been different.

Moving on about the rotations, how could Krystkowiak put a lineup on the floor of Williams/Ivey/Bell/Villanueva/Bogut and stick with it for 6 minutes in the 4th quarter? I know he clings to the idea that Bell can play defense, but how can you possibly compete with two total offensive non-factors on the floor? Are you trying to shut the Bulls out? Because that’s how good the D would have to be.

Bell cannot guard small forwards any better than Redd can. Bell gives up 6 inches and 25 pounds to Deng. What is he supposed to do? Meanwhile, Bell continues to seemingly go out of his way to shoot the Bucks out of games. He’s shot 4-28 (14%) in the last 6 games and yet has somehow played 132 minutes. And it’s not like he’s on a 6 game cold streak — he’s down to 28% shooting on the year. At least he hasn’t guarded anyone effectively either. What does this guy have to do to get benched? Check into a game without his shoes on? He should be spelling Williams for 8-10 minutes a night and that is it.

So what should the rotations be? Given that Simmons is only good for 15 a night and we want Redd at small forward for no more than 10, that leaves 23 minutes to be filled. You simply have to start putting Charlie Villanueva there and playing him alongside Yi.

Villanueva isn’t going to do any more damage defensively than Bell or Redd already have, and at least he’s got the length and strength to make opposing small forwards work to get the ball. That would have the added bonus of giving more court time to Yi, and also make room for a few minutes per game from Michael Ruffin (who is back and in uniform). Additionally, it would keep bigger, physical forwards off of Redd and allow him to get his offensive game back, which has really suffered from the pounding at the “3″. When was the last time he went 6-11 from the free throw line? It’s got to be partially attributed to him getting hit more often.

The Bucks can’t win without their best players on the floor and their five best players are Redd, Bogut, Williams, Yi and Villanueva. It’s that simple.

My suggested rotations:

Point guard: Williams (38 mpg), Bell (10)
Shooting guard: Redd (30), Ivey (18)
Small Forward: Simmons (15), Redd (10), Villanueva (23)
Power Forward: Yi (33), Villanueva (12), Ruffin/Gadzuric (3)
Center: Bogut (33), Voskuhl (12), Ruffin/Gadzuric (3)

I don’t see any other way. They can’t win with Bell playing a significant part of the backcourt or Redd being a big part of the frontcourt.

Well, another day, another loss to one of the 5 worst teams in the league. Yet again, the Bucks couldn’t handle a Sacramento team that is missing 2 of its 3 best players.

And according to the Journal-Sentinel, after the game, Coach Krystkowiak was talking lineup changes;

“It’s frustrating,” Krystkowiak said. “All of a sudden, we go the last 17 possessions of the second quarter and they score one field goal. So they were 1 of 17 to finish the half. Maybe we need to get the defenders on the floor to start with. Maybe that’s what it boils down to. Obviously, we haven’t done a great job defensively to start games and it’s probably going to warrant a lineup change.”

Wait … the defenders? Who are the defenders? Do you even know who’s on your roster?

Oh no … don’t tell me you are thinking about starting Royal Ivey over Mo. Atlanta tried that in 2004-05 and while he might be okay defensively he’s such a non-factor offensively that they were outscored by 2 ppg more with him on the floor than off. Playing offense 4-on-5 almost never works, unless you’ve got Ben Wallace (circa 2002).

So who are the rest of the defenders? Not Gadzuric, considering he’s played 12 minutes in 8 games. Not Simmons, considering he only played 15 minutes last night in a game that Mason sat out the second half. Oh, I get it … Charlie Bell must be The Defender — he’s played 87 minutes in the last 4 games and shot 3-21 with no free throws. So it must be his stifling defense that’s keeping him on the floor.

You know the Bucks are second worst in the leage in opposing 3-point shooting percent? A big part of that is probably Bell’s defense, since at 6′3″ he’s not really big enough to close out on most opposing shooting guards.

The thing that seems to have Krystkowiak so steamed is that Sacramento opened the game making 11 of their first 12 shots. However, the Kings are still an NBA team and NBA teams will have hot streaks. It’s not like one defender was getting torched in the first 8 minutes, every King player scored and all of them except Mikki Moore had at least one assist. They played well for 8 minutes, good for them. Through all of that only opened a 10 point lead, and the Bucks got it down to one by the end of the quarter.

The problem wasn’t the Bucks’ defense — they only allowed 102 points, and but for the game ending 17-4 run by Sacramento, they were on pace to allow closer to 95. The problem was the substitution pattern.

Okay, so Mason isn’t available in the second half and Krystowiak hates Simmons (although it’s very possible that Simmons isn’t 100% and can’t go much more than 15 mpg). Krystowiak never uses Storey and Villanueva was not available. Against just about any other team I’d say, okay, now you have no choice but to finish the game with Bell or Ivey at shooting guard and, as much as I hate it, move Redd to small forward.

But this is Sacramento you are playing, and Redd at small forward means that you force Ron Artest to guard him — something you want to try and avoid (or at least, make Sacramento do goofy stuff to get the Redd-Artest matchup).

This was a time for some original thinking, not a time to throw out the usual sub-par lineup and pray that they could shut down the Kings the rest of the way. This was a night where you had one choice — try to outscore them.

The thing to do, with 5 minutes to go and the game tied, was to move Yi to small forward and play Gadzuric at power forward.

Then you force Theus to react. He had already gone small (Urdih-Garcia-Salmons-Artest-Miller) but if the Bucks roll out Williams-Redd-Yi-Gadzuric-Bogut then the Kings wouldn’t be able to get a rebound and Artest would have to leave his power forward spot to guard Redd. Theus would probably have to pull Garcia and bring back Moore or Hawes, clearing more perimeter space for Redd to work.

This lineup probably wouldn’t have worked, since Urdih was unconscious from deep late in the game, but it would have given the Bucks a better chance, instead of sending Krystkowiak to the film wondering why his invisible “defenders” couldn’t stop an inferior team yet again.

The Bucks are going to finish in fourth place in the division this year. However, they could be anywhere between the 5th best and 12th best teams in the conference, so there is plenty to think about for this season. Here’s a player-by-player look at what we can expect to see on the court this season (listed in order of salary):

Michael Redd: He is in his prime and has raised his game a little bit every season. Hopefully this is the year that his teammates bring enough offense to allow him to reduce his load a little. Despite his reputation, Redd is more than just a standstill jump shooter — he got to the line very effectively last season, and it would be nice to see him add a wrinkle to his game by dishing the ball off on his drives more often. Redd will never be much of a defensive player, but at least his offense has always been good enough to make his court contribution net-positive unless he has to stick the best opposition (Iverson and Kobe are two guys who have always absolutely killed him). The bottom line is that Michael Redd is a solid star — not someone who can carry you to the championship, but a star nonetheless.

Bobby Simmons: Hopefully the real Simmons finally shows up this season. When healthy, he is a tough, physical defender (think a sane Ron Artest with 80% of the ability) and an excellent three-point shooter. Simmons played hurt for most of his first season with the Bucks and never really got on track, but he’s an important part of the puzzle this year. Simmons is the only starter who can be considered a plus-defender and he is also a good rebounder for his position, so getting him back into the lineup addresses the Bucks’ two major weaknesses.

Mo Williams: I’ve never really bought into the whole “pure point guard” vs. “shoot-first point guard” thing for two reasons: first, the most important thing is for the team to score more points than the opposition and, second, there isnt really any good way to objectively measure how good a passer a player is. Assists, for example, has as much to do with the point guards’ pass as it does with the finishing ability of the recipient and the decision of the official scorer. So does Mo shoot too much? Last season he took the 5th most shots per 40 minutes of all point guards (behind Arenas, Parker, Cassell and Davis) with 16.87, but the difference between him and the #21 point guard (Stephon Marbury) was only 2.81 shots per 40! That’s less than 1 per quarter! Also, Mo had several games where he was the only starter in uniform, so his scoring was necessary. No, his shooting was fine. Mo’s new contract is reasonable given his production and age, and he still has room to improve. Point guards often take years and years to reach their peaks, so while Williams will most likely plateau as a slightly below-all-star level player, there is always the outside chance that he could have a Chanuncey Billups-like career.

Desmond Mason: Don’t expect much production from Mason, as his game has really slipped in the last couple of years and he’s no longer good enough to be a full time starter. However, this signing provides good value for several reasons. He fills an important role as the backup small forward, and may be needed for as much as 25 minutes a night depending on Simmons’ health. He wont complain about not starting and should provide bursts of energy off the bench. Also, his contract is only two years, so he could be a valuable trade asset next season. Finally, he is a quality person who wanted to sign in Milwaukee. As long as the team doesn’t ask him to do too much on the court, this was a good signing. Should they wind up needing for him to start … that’s trouble.

Dan Gadzuric: After being misused by Terry Stotts and suffering through a simply awful season, it was hard to believe that Danny G was even an NBA player at all at times. It seemed like everything he touched bounced off his hands last year (making me wonder if he was playing with some kind of lingering finger injury) contributing to a lousy shooting percentage, high turnover rate, and dropoff in his rebounding. He also fouled too much, but that’s typical for him. I’m glad to see that Coach Krystkowiak is thinking about playing him at power forward, where his rebounding will be a big plus and maybe matching up with players closer to his size will help him rush less and concentrate more on holding onto the ball. He can’t possibly be as bad as he was last season, but he’s never going to play up to his contract, which has 4 years and $25 million remaining.

Andrew Bogut: While it’s pretty clear by now that he will never reach the level of some other young centers like Amare Stoudemire or Dwight Howard, hopefully Bogut will make the leap this year to a sort of “best of the rest” category. Bogut is younger than many people may realize — still 1 year younger than Patrick Ewing was in his rookie season — so there is still time for Bogut to mature physically. He is bigger this season and looked very good in the preseason, and hopefully that will transfer into a more agressive, physical game — because that’s what this team needs. They are depending on him to be their best rebounder, and an extra one per quarter would make a huge difference. I would also like to see Bogut shoot more. He shot 55% from the floor, which for a good offensive player (except for Shaq) means he isn’t shooting enough because he passes up too many difficult shots. At some point, Bogut’s game will have to make a big jump to justify being the #1 pick in the draft, and hopefully that jump comes now. But if he only improves his rebounding, then that will be enough to make him one of the best non-all-star true centers in the game.

Jake Voskuhl: Should Danny G drop the ball again this season then Voskuhl will see some playing time, but hopefully that wont happen. He’s not very good defensively, an okay shooter, not a particularly special rebounder … well, he’s a #3 center. What do you expect.

Charlie Bell: This is the exact opposite of the Desmond Mason signing. His contract is for very reasonable dollars but way too long (some other time I’ll write about why matching his contract was really, really dumb). If anything, Bell deserved even more money up front (considering how well he played the last two years for the minimum) but a 5 year contract to any role player, especially one who is 28 years old, is not a wise move. In the other anti-parallels to the Mason signing; Bell is effective on the court, doesn’t want to be here and showed up to camp out of shape (logically, though, he didn’t work out in the summer lest he injure himself while he had no contract, so that’s not a problem, and he is a quality person who just doesn’t want to be on the Bucks any longer). If Bell plays like he did the last two seasons he will be a valuable backup to both Williams and Redd who pulls his weight on the court and also who’s ability to play multiple positions allows a great deal of roster flexibility. However, I wonder what happens if he struggles on the court and never stops playing this whiny “I hate the Bucks” game. We don’t need the backup guard to be a distraction. I’ve been knocking Bell for a long time now, and I really do want him to succeed, but I just can’t shake the feeling that his head isn’t all here.

Yi Jianlian: Superstar or bust? 19 or 23 years old? The questions don’t end with this guy, and I think that finding out what we have here will cause some major growing pains — and some losses. I’m afraid that Yi’s rookie year will look a lot like Adam Morrison’s: he gets force-fed minutes, he has a few scoring outbursts but is lacking in other facets of the game, and his defense will be so bad that he costs them games. Hopefully Yi shoots better than Morrison. Yi had one 12-rebound preseason game, but also one where he was repeatedly beaten for baskets and boards by Kenyon Martin (he of the microfracture surgery on both knees). Hopefully Yi has enough of a mean streak that he will brush off the bad games, toughen up, take advantage of his size and deliver some punishment. I hope he’s not too soft for that.

Charlie Villanueva: It’s tough to figure out what to do with guys with Charlie V’s skill set. Such a tantalizing combination of shooting and distributing ability but too weak to play power forward and too big/slow to play small forward. Toronto dumped him because they couldn’t use him with Chris Bosh and now they have the same problem with Andrea Bargnani, and Lamar Odom has bounced back and forth between the forward positions with multiple teams. Villanueva is a double-double machine when he’s healthy and motivated, and one wonders if the force-feeding of minutes to Yi will hurt Charlie V’s attitude and intensity. Because of all the question marks — some of which are beyond Villanueva’s control — it’s tough to say that the Bucks can depend on him. hopefully he can play 10 mpg at small forward, get 35 mpg overall, and put to rest the questions about who won the TJ Ford trade.

Michael Ruffin: I’m glad to see the Bucks kept him instead of Samaki Walker. Ruffin is one of the most comically bad offensive players in NBA history, but at least he knows it and stays out of the way. He can rebound and play tough D, and given the amount of offensive talent on the team he fills some needs. Gadzuric will always have those occassional nights where he gets 5 fouls in 4 minutes, and Ruffin can step in as the third power forward or (undersized) center for a few minutes at a time. He’s a good signing as an 11th man.

Royal Ivey, Awvee Storey, David Noel, Ramon Sessions: If any of these guys are playing much than things have gone awry. Ivey will be at the end of the bench for defense at the guard spots, and Storey was signed as a #3 small forward in case Simmons can’t go and Mason is pressed into the starting lineup. David Noel would be best served spending the season in the NBDL trying to fill out his game. The same could probably be said for Sessions, as he would be better off playing 25 minutes a game somewhere else rather than 2 mpg here.

The best-case scenario for this team is that Bogut turns into a big-time rebounder, Yi brings high-percentage scoring and Charlie V becomes a multi-position threat. In terms of overall talent, this team could be the second deepest in the East (behind Chicago), which is exciting because the top 8 players are under 30 years old and under contract for at least 3 years. However, if the rebounding doesn’t sort itself out and Yi struggles, then the team’s lack of defensive presence could cause it all to fall apart. This team can win anywhere from 35 to 45 games. They could even win a playoff series (in a perfect world, I could see them beating Detroit or Cleveland). But they could also really collapse. So, here’s my fearless prediction: 42 wins, 8th seed in the playoffs.