As always, the Brew Hoop community came up big, posing some very thoughtful questions. Coaching, projections, perspective, roster construction, team priorities, and more. You hit ’em all. Here’s our takes; thanks for choppin’ it up.
Coaching
Harms: Where would you rank Taylor Jenkins right now vs the rest of the league Head coaches?
Zac: This is such a hard question to answer; any coach is only as good as the players they have. Of course, as cliché as it is, a coach has to make their team better than the sum of its parts too. Clearly, that hasn’t happened in Milwaukee for some time. Statistically, 13 current head coaches have a better career winning percentage than Taylor Jenkins, while 15 have a worse career winning percentage. Nick Nurse is tied at 53.9%. But that ignores context.
Advertisement
From my vantage point, Joe Mazzulla, Steve Kerr, Rick Carlisle, Erik Spoelstra, and Mark Daigneault (in no particular order) all deserve recognition as better coaches than Jenkins. Then there’s Mike Brown, who just led the New York Knicks to the championship, but I’m not convinced he’s better. The same can be said for Tyronn Lue and Nick Nurse. On the other end of the spectrum, Micah Nori, Sean Sweeney, and Dusty May are yet to coach a single NBA game, so Jenkins gets the nod as better by default. You can’t convince me he’s not better than Brian Keefe, Tuomas Iasolo, Doug Christie, Charles Lee, Jamahl Mosley, and Tiago Splitter, either.
With all that in mind, I have him somewhere between sixth and 21st. That’s a huge range, I know. But, like so many of the players on this roster, Jenkins also has a lot to prove. For what it’s worth, I think he’s up to the challenge—as I outlined in my April dive into the Bucks’ coaching search and Jenkin’s past. Let him sow.
Player projections
Harms: Who will be the most improved buck? Some recent articles and podcasts have been talking up Dieng as a possibility.
Zac: This is another legitimately tough one. With so many unproven players, it could be nearly anyone—besides the rookies, of course (you need a baseline to judge improvement). To your point, Ousmane Dieng showed a lot after coming over at the trade deadline last season, but I just can’t see him having as much responsibility—at least with the ball—to make a run at this title. Kasparas Jakučionis is someone I’m really intrigued with, but he doesn’t seem to have a pathway to enough minutes to take it, either. Jaime Jaquez Jr., on the other hand, figures to get plenty of opportunity at both of the forward positions. He also offers something this squad lacks—downhill attack and paint scoring.
Advertisement
On the flip side, there are numerous veterans who have a realistic shot at being MIB (that’s most improved Buck). After playing so poorly last year, Myles Turner is due to bounce back. Then again, would this really be improvement? Herro, playing for the first time in his career as a number one option, could potentially explode too. But would that be improvement, or just increased opportunity and usage?
You know what? I think Ryan Rollins doubles down on his improvement from a year ago but this time gets the recognition for it (at least from a league-wide perspective). He increases his points to about 20 a night—those off-season workouts with James Harden pay dividends at the stripe—and, more importantly, becomes one of the leaders on the team, cementing his place as the team’s point guard of the present and the future.
Harms: What do you anticipate the roles of vets like Trent, Green and kuzma to be to start the season?
Jack: OK, so for Trent—who we hope is cleared of any wrongdoing, LOL—I think they’re going to have to play him at least 15 minutes per game (certainly at the start of the season) to not make his contract look even fishier? Like, it would look pretty suspicious to pay someone $64m and then not play them, even if they haven’t warranted minutes. The more I think about it, the more I realize you just cannot do that; the optics are horrible. This annoys me a fair bit because those minutes should go to younger players, but instead they’re going to a guy who has no future on this team because Horst made a deal with the devil. Tough.
Gosh, I feel like AJ, through no fault of his own, is now the odd man out? So many combo guards need to play. Like, Rollins, Herro, Porter, LeVert, Burries… where does Green fit, and how can you find him minutes? At 26, does he fit into the “next wave,” or is he more valuable as a trade chip? I just feel like at least one of these guards has to be traded, which was why everyone was floating Green as the guy to go out in any potential Peyton Watson deal. Do I think “choosing” others over Green would be the right choice? I am far from sure. What I will say is that AJ has probably hit his ceiling as a player, so if you value what he brings, that’s great, but there probably isn’t much more evolution to come.
Advertisement
I reckon there’s a decent chance Kuz starts at the four at the beginning of the season and plays 25-30 minutes per night. It feels like he’s going to take on a leadership role as a vet on this young team. Other commenters have mentioned this before, but I think this team will try its hardest to win up until the trade deadline; however, it might shift to a more developmental focus after that (even though there’s no value in tanking since they don’t have their first-round pick). Ergo, if Kuzma isn’t traded at the deadline, I could see his minutes cut substantially as they wait for his contract to expire.
Statistically speaking
Harms: How many assists and turnovers per game do you anticipate? Who will lead in each category?
Jack: To the first question, the Bucks averaged 25.8 assists per game last season, ranking middle of the pack (16th). I found this interesting because I don’t feel like the team moved the ball particularly well last season, but I guess that’s what happens when you have Giannis; you’re just naturally going to rack up assists because he— being the physical presence he is—demands multiple defenders, which creates open looks. Without Giannis, I am confident the team will move the ball better, but still end up with a similar number of assists per game, if that makes sense. Like, the assists they get will “look better” because the ball has moved in a more typical fashion, but the number itself won’t shift much.
As for turnovers, the Bucks finished last season ranking 21st at 15.2 per game (meaning they averaged the ninth-most in the NBA). Funnily enough, my prediction for this is similar to my prediction for assists: they will land in a similar spot, but for a different reason. Last season was a mess; nobody really knew their role, and Giannis was often injured, which led to a chaotic style of play and thus, many turnovers. This season, the team is basically brand new and has little to no continuity, so I predict similar chaos and a similar number of turnovers per game.
Advertisement
Regarding the leader in each category, Ryan Rollins is my pick to lead in assists, closely followed by Kevin Porter Jr. As for turnovers, the obvious answer is KPJ, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some teething issues with Kel’el Ware as he tries to expand his offensive game.
Coverage and perspective
Wisconsin Sam: I would like to know if you feel your “outsider” perspective (as referenced in Jack’s articles about how Giannis CLEARLY should have been traded a year earlier, as opposed to us sentimental locals who wanted to hang on to our precious Freak as long as we could and never never let him go… maybe that’s just me) affects your coverage at all. Also if it makes you say things like “chinwag.”
Zac: Honestly, it has to, right? But I don’t see “affects” as a negative. Not being from Milwaukee (I have visited though—on my honeymoon no less!), we don’t have the same ties to the city as locals do, but don’t for a second confuse that for a lack of care or investment in this team. In fact, I’d say it’s the opposite. Following (and covering) a team from afar is arguably more difficult—games air during the workday, we don’t get to see them in person, and most people we encounter have only a very casual relationship with the NBA—let alone the Bucks—so fandom can be isolating. You don’t commit to a team like the Bucks without doing so wholeheartedly and some of my greatest memories are because of this team. So, trust me, we are sentimental (see my Bobby Simmons piece and, more pertinently, this and this about just what Giannis means to me). But, again, my sentimentality is not the same as yours. It can’t be.
As for “chinwag,” I wouldn’t say it’s a part of my daily vernacular, but it is a great term—just think of the imagery! Plus, I’ve grown rather protective fond of chin-related nomenclature—my high school PE teacher nicknamed me “Jaws” for my, uh, substantial jaw (and it’s still a running joke in my circle). Let the chins wag!
Advertisement
Roster and contracts
BarryDort: With it being rookie extension season, should the Bucks offer the rookie extension to Jaime Jaquez Jr. and what type of deal should they offer?
Jack: I don’t think the Bucks should be in any rush to extend Jaquez. If he wants to accept a “below-market deal”—maybe like 5/100 or 4/88—I might do it, but I’d probably prefer to wait and let him hit RFA. Horst and co. need to gather more data on JJJ to discern if they see him as part of the “next great Bucks team” or if they view him more as a bridge player that could help a contender now. Also, unethical as they are, restricted free agency rules have proven an effective tool for teams to force players into signing below-market contracts (see: Josh Giddey, Jonathan Kuminga… maybe Jalen Duren this offseason). If the Bucks can save a few… bucks… they should do exactly that. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
BarryDort: Everyone assumes Ryan Rollins is going to be a Buck for a long time. However, after this season he will most likely opt out of his deal and become an unrestricted free agent. How much is it going to cost to keep him and will it even matter if he decides he has a better opportunity somewhere else in the league?
Zac: How much it costs to keep him largely depends on his play this season. Was last year’s growth for real? Does he take another step? My answer to both is “Yes,” but there’s a very real chance that he regresses too. Looking at league-wide players salaries, and assuming Rollins does continue his ascension, it’s hard not to see him in the mid-20s annually. If not more. As for a better opportunity elsewhere? I don’t see it, certainly not in terms of touches and role—and Rollins doesn’t seem to be at the point in his career where he’d prioritise winning over those. He’s also had a lot of instability in his young career—three teams and plenty of time in the G-League in just four seasons as a pro—so you’d think (hope?) he’d value continuity.
Kaz5: If no trades happen before the season starts (which is kind of what I’m assuming now), who makes the team and who gets cut?
Jack: If no trades happen, I’d bet a lot of money they convert Pete Nance back to a two-way, since he has one year of two-way eligibility left (I think). From there, I can’t see how they take this many guards into the season; Horst could very well eat KPJ or LeVert’s expiring contract, and voila, you’re at 15 players.
Advertisement
Zac: I’ll jump in on this one too. I agree that a trade this late is unlikely—but you never know (just see the Damian Lillard trade to Milwaukee, which happened on September 27). In that case, I assume Pete Nance is one of the unlucky roster cuts, mainly due to him having a non-guaranteed contract. As for the other one, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bucks waive Caris LeVert. His $14.8m salary would be handy in future trade scenarios, but he just feels too much like the odd man out in this team (age, position etc.).
Team priorities
BarryDort: What should the Bucks prioritize for next year, winning or development? I believe you can only do one or the other at the same time. Development is playing 10-12 guys 20-25 minutes a game to get better and determine who is going to be part of the team going forward. Playing veterans 30 plus minutes a game doesn’t accomplish that goal.
Jack: I believe Milwaukee should prioritise development. When I weigh the upside vs. the downside of trying to win every game, the upside is that fans, by and large, are generally more content (which leads to higher ticket sales) and that the Bucks don’t give up such a high draft pick (but then again, with the flattened draft odds, who really knows). Additionally, as I’ve mentioned before, this draft is not great, so giving up a high pick is not nearly as costly/embarrassing as it ordinarily would be.
On the other hand, the downside of going all out to win every game is that you lose valuable opportunities to collect data on the young guys and expose them to NBA basketball, which, three years down the line, could prove costly. Also, as a fan, I want to see these guys play more than I do your Kyle Kuzmas or Caris LeVerts. Even if it’s not pretty, I want to see the “kids” play and would get a lot of joy out of it.
Mayor of Ding Dong City: My question is a two parter- which three players do you feel like are most likely traded during the season (bonus points for making rough % chance each get traded) and which players would you most likely look to trade if you were Horst?
Zac: I can’t go past Tyler Herro, Myles Turner, and Kyle Kuzma. For one, these guys don’t fit the Bucks’ timeline for contention—Herro will be 27 in January, Turner will be 31 in March, and Kuzma already is 31. While these ages don’t make them old, they are getting up there, at least in terms of playing prime. Moreover, as skillful veterans (yes, even in Kuzma’s case), they are more likely targets for teams looking for impact players now, especially around the trade deadline when teams have a clear indication of where they sit and are therefore more likely to go “all in.” And while I’m someone who really values veteran leadership on the roster—just see my Culture setters piece from earlier this offseason—if the Bucks can turn them into picks or younger assets, they certainly have to go for it. Percentage-wise, I’ll go Kuzma at 70% (his expiring contract helps here), Turner at 55%, and Herro at 35% (just know I am not a gambling man).
Advertisement
As for the second part of your question, if I’m Horst, I want to build with and around guys who want to be here. For all their warts, Herro (via public comments), Turner (through hosting the team in Texas), and Kuzma have all made steps in showing that desire. Having said this, I’m supremely cognisant to the fact that at least two of these guys (Herro and Turner) stand directly in the way of the two Bucks with the most upside, Brayden Burries and Kel’el Ware. Kuzma, with Jaime Jaquez Jr., Nate Ament, and even Ousmane Dieng, presents a similar situation. So, all things considered, I’d honestly stick with the same three names, with the caveat that it depends on what everyone shows early on in the season (and that there are no takers for Gary Trent Jr.). Outside of these three, I’d look at freeing up some of the guard room, in which case AJ Green and Kevin Porter Jr. seem the most likely candidates—they offer an enticing combination of strong talent and low salary to interest a number of teams.
Kaz5: The Bucks are obviously rebuilding. What is a realistic timeline to be a championship contender again? Five years? So, who will be a part of that future? Similar to what others have said, I’d love to see a roster analysis. I’d especially be interested in hearing insights on which guys they will try to trade in the very-near future. I have no issue with these guys as Milwaukee Bucks, but I feel like the following guys don’t fit that 4-5 year timeline:
I think each of those guys can contribute to a winning team, but that’s not the Bucks right now. Which of those guys will be traded pre-season? Mid-season? Next off-season?
Jack: Sorry, this turned into a much longer answer. Yeah, I’d say the Bucks are looking at a 4-6 year window for when they hope to contend again. At the very least, they’d want to be showing signs that they’re getting close by the fourth or fifth year. With that said, this is made much more difficult due to Milwaukee having precious few first-round picks over this timeline. Now, what they have is a pick surplus from 2031 onward thanks to the Giannis trade, and those Heat picks could be very valuable.
That gives you two options: 1) be patient with the rebuild and maybe even extend your timeline a year or two and make one or both of those Heat picks yourself in 2031 and 2033, or 2), trade those picks over the next few years in exhange for immediate help—whether that be through the upcoming drafts or in a trade for an established player—and speed up the process. I don’t know the right answer; what I will say is that the hasty nature of Horst’s operations over the past eight years has naturally made me more inclined to see the front office exercise patience. It’s not about constructing a team that can merely win a few playoff games in the first round; it’s about building something that can have sustainable success at the highest level.
As for the guys you mentioned, I agree that in an ideal world, all of them would be traded. However, as you’ll see in an upcoming article, not all of them have great trade value. Herro’s a good chance to be dealt to a win-now team mid-season if he plays OK for the first 50 games and doesn’t get injured. Kuzma is an expiring, so he’ll either get dealt mid-season for some middling picks or just expire—LeVert same thing. Nobody’s touching Trent’s contract for at least two years, I’m sorry to say. Turner, if he plays well to start the year, could be moved mid-season; the contract isn’t great, but it’s not awful either.
How’d we go, folks? Agree with our takes or think that we’re trippin’? Either way, let us know in the comments and thanks again for your questions. Questions & Antlers will return in November, at about the quarter mark of the season, where we can chat about early season impressions.
Read the full article here
