Wolves - Bucks

The Good:
The game was *fun* to watch.

KG didn't shrink in the 4th. They may have lost, but it wasn't because
of lack of aggressiveness from KG.

I felt like James was the best guard on the floor, for either team. It
just had to come during a loss.

Davis's offense. I can live with the defensive mistakes if he's trying
(which I think he was last night), and he makes up for it with
aggressive play on offense.

I haven't read about KG's comments yet. I'm starting to wish he's stop
being so negative in the press, but I also understand his frustration.

Smith and Blount both played great.

The Bad:
I hate to keep harping on this, but I don't understand why Casey
continues to give the Wolves second best player less than 20 minutes
per game.

Perimeter defense. That includes Hassell as well. This wasn't one of
the defensive maestro's best performances. Maybe the bucks perimeter
guys are just that good.

Foye's minutes. This was the perfect team to get Foye in the game
running and slashing. It would have been interesting to see a James,
Foye, Davis (or Hassell), Smith and KG lineup.

McHale has made his share of mistakes, but it's tough to can him after
such a good draft and a nice addition (James). The time to fire Mchale
would have been after the Wally and Jaric trades. I think Casey has the
guns, he's just not using them properly.

Overall, I liked the effort. I firmly believe that if Smith and Foye
would have played more, the Wolves would have won. I guess that means I
place another loss on the shoulders of Casey.
 >> Stay informed about: Wolves - Bucks 

ikrushlots.RemoveThis@aol.com wrote:
> The Good:
> The game was *fun* to watch.
>
> KG didn't shrink in the 4th. They may have lost, but it wasn't because
> of lack of aggressiveness from KG.
>
> I felt like James was the best guard on the floor, for either team. It
> just had to come during a loss.
>
> Davis's offense. I can live with the defensive mistakes if he's trying
> (which I think he was last night), and he makes up for it with
> aggressive play on offense.
>
> I haven't read about KG's comments yet. I'm starting to wish he's stop
> being so negative in the press, but I also understand his frustration.
>
> Smith and Blount both played great.
>
> The Bad:
> I hate to keep harping on this, but I don't understand why Casey
> continues to give the Wolves second best player less than 20 minutes
> per game.
>
> Perimeter defense. That includes Hassell as well. This wasn't one of
> the defensive maestro's best performances. Maybe the bucks perimeter
> guys are just that good.

I noticed that the Bucks won convincingly
in San Antonio (sans Ginobili, tho) last night.

Maybe there's more than beer in Milwaukee.

>
> Foye's minutes. This was the perfect team to get Foye in the game
> running and slashing. It would have been interesting to see a James,
> Foye, Davis (or Hassell), Smith and KG lineup.
>
> McHale has made his share of mistakes, but it's tough to can him after
> such a good draft and a nice addition (James). The time to fire Mchale
> would have been after the Wally and Jaric trades. I think Casey has the
> guns, he's just not using them properly.
>
> Overall, I liked the effort. I firmly believe that if Smith and Foye
> would have played more, the Wolves would have won. I guess that means I
> place another loss on the shoulders of Casey.

On the other hand, I'm getting down on Casey for
playing Smith & Foye too much late against the Bulls.
 >> Stay informed about: Wolves - Bucks 

On 23 Dec 2006 11:37:23 -0800, "ikrushlots@aol.com"
<ikrushlots.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote:

>The Good:
>The game was *fun* to watch.
>
>KG didn't shrink in the 4th. They may have lost, but it wasn't because
>of lack of aggressiveness from KG.

Same old story.

>I felt like James was the best guard on the floor, for either team. It
>just had to come during a loss.

It was the Bucks, that's not saying much, IMO.

>Davis's offense. I can live with the defensive mistakes if he's trying
>(which I think he was last night), and he makes up for it with
>aggressive play on offense.

Aggressive....and sloppy. He was missing three's, turning the ball
over, etc. He did score 23, but not because his game was so "on".

>I haven't read about KG's comments yet. I'm starting to wish he's stop
>being so negative in the press, but I also understand his frustration.

If you understand his frustration, then you should understand his
comments. I know I do.

>Smith and Blount both played great.

Blount didn't look bad, better than the average Wolves centers
over the last few seasons, IMO.

Smith should have played more minutes, especially in the 4th.

>The Bad:
>
>I hate to keep harping on this, but I don't understand why Casey
>continues to give the Wolves second best player less than 20 minutes
>per game.

Casey seems to have long periods of doing nothing...which seems
to be a big problem with the Wolves this season (and last).

>Perimeter defense. That includes Hassell as well. This wasn't one of
>the defensive maestro's best performances. Maybe the bucks perimeter
>guys are just that good.

And the Bucks perimeter guys aren't even that great, IMO.

>Foye's minutes. This was the perfect team to get Foye in the game
>running and slashing. It would have been interesting to see a James,
>Foye, Davis (or Hassell), Smith and KG lineup.

Foye was a non-entity in that game.

>McHale has made his share of mistakes, but it's tough to can him after
>such a good draft and a nice addition (James). The time to fire Mchale
>would have been after the Wally and Jaric trades. I think Casey has the
>guns, he's just not using them properly.

Yes, Casey needs to go...but I'm not sure that McHale should stay
either, at this point.

>Overall, I liked the effort.

I didn't. It was a sloppy game, IMO.

>I firmly believe that if Smith and Foye
>would have played more, the Wolves would have won. I guess that means I
>place another loss on the shoulders of Casey.

If Casey had made ANY adjustments in the 4th, when Mo Williams
started getting so hot, they may have won. He didn't, they lost...same
old story. :-/




- Scott Smith: scott.RemoveThis@sludgereport.org
Books Blog: http://scottsbooks.blogspot.com
Blue States Rising: http://www.bluestaterising.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: Wolves - Bucks 

On 27 Dec 2006 08:27:00 -0800, "levi" <levi DeleteThis @visi.com> wrote:

>ikrushlots@aol.com wrote:
>> The Good:
>> The game was *fun* to watch.
>>
>> KG didn't shrink in the 4th. They may have lost, but it wasn't because
>> of lack of aggressiveness from KG.
>>
>> I felt like James was the best guard on the floor, for either team. It
>> just had to come during a loss.
>>
>> Davis's offense. I can live with the defensive mistakes if he's trying
>> (which I think he was last night), and he makes up for it with
>> aggressive play on offense.
>>
>> I haven't read about KG's comments yet. I'm starting to wish he's stop
>> being so negative in the press, but I also understand his frustration.
>>
>> Smith and Blount both played great.
>>
>> The Bad:
>> I hate to keep harping on this, but I don't understand why Casey
>> continues to give the Wolves second best player less than 20 minutes
>> per game.
>>
>> Perimeter defense. That includes Hassell as well. This wasn't one of
>> the defensive maestro's best performances. Maybe the bucks perimeter
>> guys are just that good.
>
>I noticed that the Bucks won convincingly
>in San Antonio (sans Ginobili, tho) last night.
>
>Maybe there's more than beer in Milwaukee.

Nah. Redd and Williams just played above their heads for a
game. Every dog has it's day...just don't read too much into
it. The Bucks will remain around a .500 team for the season
and will seed at the bottom of the East for the playoffs, if they
seed at all.



- Scott Smith: scott DeleteThis @sludgereport.org
Books Blog: http://scottsbooks.blogspot.com
Blue States Rising: http://www.bluestaterising.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: Wolves - Bucks