So the Bucks are keeping Seung-Jin?

The Bucks press release announcing the Magliore trade to Portland seems to imply that the Bucks are keeping the 7'3'' South Korean wonder stiff Ha Seung-Jin. I find that hard to believe. Why would they do it? What do they see in his primitive skills that makes them think he can add value to the team? Do they even have room for him?

It makes such little sense, in fact, that I sense yet another bluff by GM Harris. Desmond Mason and Terry Porter know all about those.

SIDENOTE:
Did you notice the use of the word "certainly" in the Bucks press release? "Certainly" is the laziest, most meaningless word in the English language. (If something is a certainty, the reader ought to recognize it as such). In fact, because it is so useless, its inclusion in any communique often lends an ironic effect -- it suggests the assertion being made is one that is actually open for doubt.

Thus I interpret the language used in the Bucks press release "[Magliore] was certainly a factor in our making the play-offs", as one more subtle shot by Bucks management at the Little Cat Who Could Not Roar.

Bucks new uniforms: sneak peek?

Here is my "Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Throwback Jersey shirt" I mentioned a couple of posts ago:

Now here is the corresponding Bucks 1971 road uniform:

Here is the "Redd Jersey shirt" now selling at the Bradley Center:

If the same pattern follows, then here is the Bucks new road uniform:

Bucks Nation doesn't like Magliore deal

The Magliore for Steve Blake trade looks like a done deal. And Bucks Nation doesn't like it. If I'm hearing and reading things right, this is going to be about as popular as the incomprehensible Carlos Lee-for-two-stiffs trade the Brewers just got conned into.

As for me, I'm not overjoyed by this move, but I'm not outraged either. Magliore was a high maintenance, low production player. He was an offensive blackhole and a defensive matador. His shooting was so poor it was as if he had his eyes covered. Oh wait, he did cover his eyes when he shot! Wasn't that a cool stunt? What a chump.

To me this trade is like selling a used Saab. On the one hand you're glad to get rid of it for whatever someone will pay because the car never performed well and you knew you couldn't afford the future cost of maintenance anyway. On the other hand in the back of your mind you can't help thinking there are a lot of suckers out there who overvalue Saabs and maybe you didn't find the biggest sucker when you sold it.

Breakdown of rumored Magliore-Blazer trade

Here's a quick snapshot of what the Bucks would get if the rumored Jamaal Magliore to the Blazers trade goes through. I'll post more if it becomes fact.

Steve Blake, PG (Eff48 for '05-'06: 18.58)
Blake is an outstanding outside shooter. He is not a penetrator (91% of his shots last season were outside shots), and in keeping with the entire Bucks roster, he doesn't get to the line often. He has a basket attack percentage of only 18.7%. He is also not very efficient with his productivity as his Eff48 of 18.58 will indicate. However, his defense at the point is not bad at all. And he is an excellent ballhandler and passer. So, depending on the style of play the Bucks employ, he would represent an upgrade at point guard over Ford or Williams. For comparison sake, I have listed TJ Ford's numbers next to Blake's.

eFG%: 51.9 (TJ Ford: 44.0)
eFG on jumpers: 51.2 (TJ Ford: 41.7)
eFG on inside shots: 58.4 (TJ Ford: 47.9)
Passer Rating: 10.9 (TJ Ford: 9.3)
Ballhandler Rating: 25.0 (TJ Ford: 19.2)
Basket Attack% (FTA/FGA): 18.7 (TJ Ford: 28.1)
Defensive eFG%: 46.9% (TJ Ford: 51.3)
Assists/48 min: 8.8 (TJ Ford: 8.9)
TOs / 48 min: 2.3 (TJ Ford: 4.1)

Brian Skinner (Eff48 for '05-'06: 18.53)
Skinner, whom Bucks fans already know intimately, is sort of Magliore lite. He is everything Magliore was but less productive. He's not great at all offensively, he's merely okay defensively, and he can't pass a lick. He will get you rebounds, and he doesn't turn the ball over nearly as much as Magliore. When he was with the Bucks he had an Eff48 around 24, now he's dangling around 19. His best days are behind him. Decent backup, though.

eFG: 48.4
eFG on jump shots: 32.6
eFG on inside shots: 54.5
Passer Rating: 0.6
Rebounder Rating: 27.2
Ballhandler Rating: 3.5
Defensive eFG: 51.4
Basket Attack: 27.6%
Reb/ 48 min: 12.2 (Magliore 15.2)
TO/ 48 min: 2.4 (Magliore 3.2)

Ha Seung Jin (Eff48: 14.4)
Who the hell is this guy? I never heard of him until today. He has NO game, that's all you need to know.

Diary Readers: Pardon my laziness

A lot of people comment on this blog and I often don't respond. A lot of people send emails to bucks_diary@yahoo.com, and sometimes it takes me weeks to open them.

Unacceptable. I'm sorry. Please don't chalk it up to arrogance or indifference. I value every reader, whether a Bucks fan or just an NBA follower. The reason I'm sometimes lax, believe me, is pure laziness, nothing more.

I resolve to change that. Why? I was shamed when I found out that Larry Harris personally answers all of his email. Plus, most of the comments to my Bucks Diary entries are better than the entries they are commenting upon. (Which doesn't bother me... my entries are meant as both entertainment and conversation stimuli. After all, Mke Bucks Diary is a place for basketball fans to gather and reason together or it is nothing).

So I am going to commit myself henceforth to answering every comment: good, bad, insulting... whatever. And I will answer all emails within 48 hours of the time they are sent. Now let's see how long I can uphold that commitment. I'll do my best.

Whither Gadzuric?

Did you catch GM Larry Harris' comments to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel yesterday? He said the Bucks need to add depth at the 1, 3, and 5 positions. If I was reserve center Dan Gadzuric reading those comments while eating breakfast I think my reaction might have been.."uhhh, I play the 5".

I have laid out my position on Gadzuric in the past. In a nutshell: I realize he's not a superstar, that he couldn't throw a jumper in the ocean from the pier, that the only shot he executes well is the dunkshot, and that he is highly dependent on his teammates to produce points (87% of his baskets are assisted).

But in this NBA he is a big man who produces numbers, and that makes him a more than serviceable center. Plus he is energetic and pretty athletic. In fact, he runs the floor exceptionally well for a 5. He is about the only one on the roster who blocks shots (though his defense on the ball pretty weak), and he's a more than adequate rebounder.

Yet despite all that, his minutes were sharply curtailed from 44% in 2004-05 to 17% last season. Then he was completely forgotten in the postseason, and now it seems he doesn't fit Harris' plans for the future. What's really puzzling is that all this happened to Gadzuric after the Bucks signed him to a fairly lucrative six year contract.

If the Bucks are going to let him waste on the vine, I wish they would at least say why. Why is he suddenly of no use to the Bucks, and if he is of no use why did they pay him 6 million dollars to ride pine?

Bucks: Victims of insider trading?

SI.com's Marty Burns is reporting that the Bucks attempted to acquire Atlanta F Al Harrington but their efforts may have been thwarted by a somewhat unholy and highly suspect triangular arrangement between the Pacers, Hornets, and Hawks.

Here is the crux of Burns allegation. The Bucks reportedly offered the Hawks Jamaal Magliore for Al Harrington. The Hawks turned them down. Now the Hawks appear poised to accept the Pacers offer of cash plus a future draft pick instead.

Why the Hawks consider the Pacers offer superior to the Bucks is a bit mysterious. What is clear, as Burns reports, is that current Hawks GM Billy Knight is a former associate of Pacers GM Donnie Walsh, and that may have been decisive. While Knight's decision is arguably a breach of his fiduciary duty to the Hawks, there's nothing really illicit about rejecting the Bucks offer and accepting the Pacers. After all, its his job he's putting on the line.

The more nefarious transaction is the one that allowed the Pacers to obtain the "trade exception" in the first place. The Hornets traded it to them for little consideration in a deal that has "curious" written all over it. Speculation around the league is that Hornets owner George Shinn gifted the trade exception to the Pacers as grease money for his anticipated permanent relocation to Oklahoma. (Pacers owner Herb Simon serves on the association's relocation committee). The generosity of the Hornets offer even took Walsh by surprise. "I think (Shinn) did us a favor, but I am not exactly sure why".

Its pretty obvious why, and the whole thing is crass and unethical. Especially when it leads to a situation where bread is taken out of the mouth of my Bucks.

Ranking the Central Division Starting Fives: My project needs some tinkering

My attempt to flesh out and compare the Central Division's respective starting fives has gone a little pear shaped. My goal was to compare the Bucks starting five against the starting fives likely to be fielded by their closest rivals, in order to get a feel for what areas shaped up as glaring weaknesses for Milwaukee and what areas might be regarded as potential strengths. It sounded good, but the project has been undermined by a few miscalculations.

First, my reliance on hoopshype.com for the various starting fives is proving untenable. I used hoopshype.com because it was the only reputable site that had anything close to current depth charts. Unfortunately, those depth charts seem to be based on a little too much unfounded guesswork.

For instance, Matt from Blog-a-Bull has rightly pointed out that the more likely starting scenario for the Bulls would have Deng at the 3 spot, not Nocioni. I did my original analysis with Nocioni in the lineup. Unfortunatlely, if Deng were inserted, my entire projection chart would need revamping, as Deng brings certain strengths that Nocioni lacks and vice-versa. Oh well, the fact that the Bulls starting five came in dead last did not bolster my confidence in the original formula anyway.

Another problem is the rosters are so fluid at this point that what I write today may be obsolete tomorrow. (For instance, in my original calibrations Anthony Johnson was Indiana's starting point guard -- he is now a Maverick).

Nevertheless, I think the analysis I did and some of the comparisons between the various players I made would prove to be interesting and informative to fans of the Central Division teams. (Plus I put a lot of work into it, so I don't want to flush it all.) For that reason, I will rethink and retool my project and then give the cat one more kick.

Besides, hell its the off-season, what else do I have to do? Dream up some more bogus Magliore trade scenarios? I think we've all had enough of those. If not go immediately to realgm.com and click on the Milwaukee Bucks forum. I think they currently have Magliore being traded for Sweetriver Baines (Jordan's character from SNL skit "The First Black Harlem Globetrotter"), and two players who will never be named later. Hey, it works out under the salary cap, too!

Is Charlie Villanueva contact shy?

Immediately following Milwaukee's first round ouster by the Detroit Pistons I criticized Bucks SF Bobby Simmons because he did not get to the foul line enough. His "basket attack" ratio (FTs attempted/ FGs attempted) for last season was a paltry 22.3%.

I just calculated new Bucks PF Charlie Villanueva's basket attack ratio. I almost got sick to my stomach. It was 15.79%, which was the lowest among all of the projected starters in the Central Division. The really weird part is Villanueva is not one of these 'sit outside the arc and keep my jersey clean' players. 40% of his shots were "inside shots" as categorized by 82games.com. So how do you only get to the line 15% of the time? When you're in that close, shouldn't you be getting fouled more than that just by accident? I need some help solving this one (paulpressey25, Cheesehead, Sam from 5-point, et. al. -- I need theories).

The good news is this could be an aberration. I went back and looked at Villanueva's college statistics, and his basket attack ratio in his final season at UConn was a robust 46.5%, and it was a very respectable 38.8% for his entire college career. That's more like it.

One thing is certain. Next season the Bucks, as a team, need to make a concerted effort to get to the foul line more often. They can't constantly play uphill as they had to against the Pistons and expect to be successful.

Ranking the Central Division's Small Forwards

Continuing my on-going series "Ranking the Central Division Starting Fives", today I turn to the division's starting small forwards (as projected by hoopshype.com). I ranked them according to nine statistical categories provided by 82games.com. The rankings are listed below.

Obviously, in a division featuring LeBron James, its basically a race for second place. That's what it turned out to be. Here are my rankings.

1) LeBron James, Cleveland Cavaliers (18)
Lebron is an elite level player in the Association, so it is no surprise he is the class of this division. He is an extremely productive player, especially for a 3. GOOD: He is an exceptional ballhandler (his ballhandler rating is above most point guards) and a tremendous finisher around the basket. As a passer, he has unique "point forward" skills. He is terrific at drawing fouls and getting to the line. BAD: He is an adequate rebounder. And while his defensive stats are okay, his technique needs serious improvement. His one glaring weakness is his outside shooting. He is a very poor jump shooter, especially from range. Once he tightens that up, look out world.

2) Andres Nocioni, Chicago Bulls (26)
I love Nocioni. Before the play-offs, I was hoping the Bucks could steal him away from the Bulls. After his tremendous play in the Miami series, however, that thought perished. GOOD: Nocioni is an exceptional rebounder from the 3 spot. He is also a very good jump shooter, and he is quite productive. BAD: His defensive numbers shocked me. I thought defense was one of his specialities, but his opponent eFG is too high at over 51%. He is a very bad passer and ballhandler for a wingplayer. He doesn't draw many fouls, and he lacks a strong inside game.

3) Danny Granger, Indiana Pacers (27)
Here's an up-and-comer. Granger is a strong 3 who is likely to only get better. GOOD: Granger is a terrific rebounder, a strong defender, and quite effective at getting to the line. BAD: He needs to improve his outside shooting, ballhandling, and passing. He is middle-of-the-pack as far as efficient productivity, but that should improve.

4) Bobby Simmons, Milwaukee Bucks (28)
Simmons could and should be the second best small forward in the division, but he is wasting some of his physical talents. He needs to be more aggressive offensively, and he needs to tighten up his defense. Though he is an excellent shooter from range, he needs to start taking the ball to the hole more often. GOOD: Simmons is far-and-away the best jump shooting 3 in the division. He is also a decent ballhandler. BAD: With his physique, he should be a much better inside player. Indeed, he's a pretty good finisher. However, he has fallen in love with the jump shot and almost never ventures into the lane. Hence, he is very bad at drawing fouls, and he isn't a very productive rebounder. In medical circles this is referred to as "Tim Thomas Disease". Finally, his defensive numbers from last season are awful. He can do much better.

5) Tayshaun Prince, Detroit Pistons (31)
To some extent, this ranking does not adequately reflect Prince's value. He is an exceptional defender, and in spots he can be an excellent offensive player. What he lacks is consistency. It should be noted that he is a very good postseason player. He dominated Simmons in their play-off matchup. GOOD: As mentioned, his defense is usually superb. He is also an above average ballhandler. For such a skinny guy, he also finishes well around the rim. BAD: He is a terrible jumpshooter. He is a weak rebounder. He is not a good passer. And he is pretty unproductive.

Overall eFG

1) Bobby Simmons, Bucks........................51.8%
2) Andres Nocioni, Bulls............................51.7%
3) Lebron James, Cavs..............................51.6%
4) Danny Granger, Pacers.........................49.4%
5) Tayshaun Prince, Pistons......................48.8%

eFG on Jump Shots Only

1) Simmons, Bucks...............................51.9%
2) Nocioni, Bulls...................................49.4%
3) Granger, Pistons..............................44.5%
4) James, Cavs......................................41.7%
5) Prince, Pistons...................................41.5%

eFG on Inside Shots Only

1) James, Cavs.....................................69.1%
2) Prince, Pistons.................................62.6%
3) Granger, Pacers...............................59.1%
4) Nocioni, Bulls....................................56.1%
5) Simmons, Bucks...............................51.9%

"Draw Fouls" % (Times Fouled/FG attempts)

1) James, Cavs...........................................16.3%
2) Granger, Pacers....................................12.3%
3) Nocioni, Bulls.........................................9.8%
3) Prince, Pistons.......................................9.8%
5) Simmons, Bucks....................................7.6%

82games.com Passer Rating

1) James, Cavs............................................9.7
2) Simmons, Bucks.....................................4.0
3) Prince, Pistons........................................3.4
4) Granger, Pacers.....................................2.0
4) Nocioni, Bulls..........................................2.0

82games.com Rebounder Rating

1) Nocioni, Bulls...........................................22.9
2) Granger, Pacers.......................................22.2
3) James, Cavs..............................................17.5
4) Simmons, Bucks........................................14.0
5) Prince, Pistons...........................................12.7

82games.com Ballhandler Rating

1) James, Cavs..............................................22.3
2) Prince, Pistons..........................................15.1
3) Simmons, Bucks........................................11.0
4) Nocioni, Bulls..............................................8.4
4) Granger, Pacers.........................................8.4

eFG % of Player Guarded (Defense)

1) Prince, Pistons................................45.5%
2) Granger, Pacers..............................47.9%
3) James, Cavs.....................................49.8%
4) Nocioni, Bulls....................................51.4%
5) Simmons, Bucks...............................53.0%

Efficient Productivity/48 minutes (Eff48)

1) James, Cavs..................................33.19
2) Nocioni, Bulls................................24.94
3) Granger, Pacers............................21.84
4) Simmons, Bucks............................19.17
5) Prince, Pistons...............................18.18

Bucks new road uniforms -- 1970s "traveling greens"?

It's generally assumed that the Bucks new traveling road uniforms will feature red as their primary color, right? Well, that has been the buzz out of Milwaukee. Not so fast.

The Bradley Center is selling new "Michael Redd jersey t-shirts" (pictured above). The shirts clearly feature the new block lettering and numbering, but the primary color is hunter green. In fact, the shirts are the same color as my throwback "Kareem Abdul-Jabbar jersey shirt" which I purchased from distant-replays.com about a year ago. This makes me believe that the Bucks may be returning to their legendary "traveling greens".

Bucks Trivia: The phrase "traveling greens" was coined by the original "Voice of the Bucks" Eddie Doucette.

If that were the case, I would love it. The nostalgia of the old Oscar Robertson hunter green roadies would be a sweet reconnection to what were the Bucks original salad days. A red look would also be okay, too, but I think green is more fraught with historical meaning for Antlerheads.

At any rate, the photo above at least gives you a feel for the new numbering and lettering. If you search the June file on this blog, you can see my speculative depictions of the new home and away jerseys, in both green and red versions.

Ranking Central Division Starting Fives

I have ranked the hoopshype.com projected starting units for each of the five teams in the NBA's Central Division. Here's my method. I researched the statistics provided for each projected starter by 82games.com. Then I took all of those statistics, combined them, and assigned each team a 1-5 ranking in nine seperate statistical categories (Avg Overall eFG, Avg Jumper eFG, Avg Inside eFG, Avg DrawFoul %, Cumulative Passer Rating, Cumulative Rebounder Rating, Cumulative Ballhandler Rating, Avg Opponent eFG, Avg Eff48). Finally, I added up all of the individual category rankings and created a collective ranking according to the team with the lowest cumulative score.

Two notes before I provide the lists. One, even with their improvements, the Bucks are still a distant fourth. Why? They don't play defense, they don't draw fouls, and their rebounding has been weakened significantly with the move of Bogut to center and the addition of Villenueva. Two, Bulls fans are going to scream bloody murder, but I have their starting five ranked fifth best. Why? PJ Brown is an awful PF, Ben Wallace seems to be a gilding of the rose (he's a defensive specialist when the Bulls were already an excellent defensive team -- why?), they don't shoot the ball that well, they don't handle it well, they don't pass it well, they have no inside game, and their lineup lacks efficient productivity (Eff48).

Next week I will provide individual rankings at each position. Meanwhile, here are all of my rankings.

Overall Ranking of projected Central Division starting fives

1. Detroit Pistons.........................(20)
2. Cleveland Cavaliers..................(24)
3. Indiana Pacers........................(27)
4. Milwaukee Bucks....................(31)
5. Chicago Bulls...........................(33)

Average Overall effective Field Goal %

1. Milwaukee Bucks.....................50.76%
2. Detroit Pistons.........................50.34%
3. Indiana Pacers.........................49.30%
4. Chicago Bulls............................49.20%
5. Cleveland Cavaliers...................47.98%

Average effective Field Goal % on Jump Shots only

1. Detroit Pistons...........................45.76%
2. Milwaukee Bucks.......................43.90%
3. Chicago Bulls...............................42.16%
4. Cleveland Cavaliers....................38.86%
5. Indiana Pacers............................37.08%

Average effective Field Goal % on Inside Shots only

1. Indiana Pacers.............................60.94%
2. Cleveland Cavaliers......................57.64%
3. Detroit Pistons..............................57.04%
4. Milwaukee Bucks..........................56.04%
5. Chicago Bulls..................................53.36%

Average "Fouls Drawn" % (Fouls Drawn / Field Goals Attempted)

1. Cleveland Cavaliers......................16.5%
2. Indiana Pacers..............................13.8%
3. Chicago Bulls.................................11.44%
4. Detroit Pistons...............................10.84%
5. Milwaukee Bucks...........................8.96%

Cumulative 82games.com Passer Ratings

1. Detroit Pistons.................................29.1
2. Cleveland Cavaliers.........................27.9
3. Milwaukee Bucks.............................22.3
4. Chicago Bulls.....................................19.3
5. Indiana Pacers..................................19.2

Cumulative 82games.com Rebounder Ratings

1. Indiana Pacers...................................106.0
2. Chicago Bulls.......................................100.2
3. Cleveland Cavaliers.............................99.3
4. Milwaukee Bucks.................................86.3
5. Detroit Pistons......................................85.0

Cumulative 82games.com Ballhandler Ratings

1. Detroit Pistons.......................................77.1
2. Cleveland Cavaliers...............................70.7
3. Milwaukee Bucks...................................67.4
4. Chicago Bulls...........................................59.6
5. Indiana Pacers........................................54.9

Average effective Field Goal % allowed

1. Detroit Pistons........................................47.08%
2. Indiana Pacers........................................48.28%
3. Chicago Bulls...........................................48.38%
4. Cleveland Cavaliers................................50.92%
5. Milwaukee Bucks....................................51.06%

Average Eff48 score (efficient productivity/48 minutes)

1. Cleveland Cavaliers.................................23.56
2. Detroit Pistons.........................................23.42
3. Indiana Pacers.........................................22.46
4. Milwaukee Bucks.....................................22.25
5. Chicago Bulls.............................................22.05

Villanueva's defense: as bad as advertised

Bucks PF Charlie Villanueva was finally introduced to the local media yesterday (why the delay?). Now somebody better introduce him to the concept of defense.

Villanueva's defense last season was awful. It was worse when he played small forward, but it can rightfully be described as putrid when he played power forward as well.

When playing the power forward slot, Villanueva allowed the opposing players he guarded to shoot a combined effective FG% of 55.9%. Compare that to the opponent eFG of 47.9% allowed by Bucks PF Andrew Bogut. Very bad.

I haven't done an extensive survey of power forwards league-wide, but a sampling (along with common sense) shows that Villanueva was one of the poorest defenders in the Association at the 4 spot last season.

However, his poor defensive numbers may have been exaggerated by his situation. Consider that Toronto starting PF Chris Bosh's defensive statistics are nearly as horrible, as he allowed opponents to shoot an eFG% of 54.7% when he played the 4.

So perhaps it was a generally poor attitude throughout the Toronto organization that led to Villanueva's awful defensive statistics. That could be, but if I were the Bucks I would be concerned about the team's overall lack of defense. It is alarming, to say the least, as I will illustrate in a future post.

NBA Point Guards: Defensive Rankings

In the final installment of my three part series on NBA point guards, we turn to defensive skills. Here I rank the floor generals according to the effective field goal percentage each allowed to the men they covered while playing the point. Again, thanks to 82games.com for the statistics.

A couple of observations brought on by the rankings.

(1) Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but here's another thing TJ Ford does not do well. In every ranking he has shown up at or near the bottom. I ask again, "How in the world is he a premier point guard?" Because he's fast? By that logic the Bucks should sign Ahmad Carroll to play the point. No, I think the truth is that TJ Ford is the ultimate "Moneyball" player. Because he looks like a point guard and flashes the athleticism and dribbling ability you traditionally look for in a point guard, basketball people keep betting on him, even though the statistics say he's complete junk.

(2) If Ben Wallace is even a shadow of his old self backcourt opponents will have a very hard time scoring on the Bulls. Hinrich and Duhon play smothering defense.

(3) Some of the players' eFGs are enhanced by the presence of shotblockers behind them who erase their mistakes.

(4) How do you explain Delonte West? Here's a guy who was a 2 in college, right? Despite that he has seemingly made a very smooth transition to PG in the pros. Granted his passing and ballhandling need improvement, but they're better than Jason Terry's, and despite those shortcomings he has shown up in the upper half of every one of my point guard rankings. So why did the Celtics trade a No. 7 pick for that stiff Telfair?

(5) Based on all three rankings, it looks like the best all-around PG in basketball is Detroit's Chauncey Billups.

Here are the rankings. The mean eFG allowed was 48.04. The median was 48.63.

1.Chris Duhon (Bulls)...........................42.6
2.Chauncey Billups (Pistons)..................42.8
3.Kirk Hinrich (Bulls)............................43.0
4.Tony Parker (Spurs)...........................44.3
5.Delonte West (Celtics).........................44.4
6.Devin Harris (Mavs)............................44.6
7.Dam Stoudamire (Grizzlies)................45.0
8.Tyronn Lue (Hawks)............................45.4
9.Sam Cassell (Clippers)..........................45.9
10.Rafer Alston (Rockets)........................46.6
11.Jamaal Tinsley (Pacers)......................46.7
12.Jameer Nelson (Magic)........................46.7
13.Jason Williams (Heat)...........................47.5
14.Deron Williams (Jazz)............................47.6
15.Marcus Banks (?)..................................48.1
16.Mike Bibby (Kings)................................48.5
17.Smush Parker (Lakers).........................48.8
18.Allen Iverson (76ers).............................49.0
19.Jason Terry (Mavs)................................49.0
20.Seb Telfair (Celtics).................................49.0
21.Baron Davis (Warriors)..........................49.2
22.Mo Williams (Bucks)................................49.2
23.Andre Miller (Nuggets)...........................49.8
24.Damon Jones (Cavs)...............................50.1
25.Gilbert Arenas (Bullets)..........................50.2
26.Chris Paul (Hornets)................................50.4
27.Jason Kidd (Nets).....................................50.6
28.Stephon Marbury (Knicks).....................51.0
29.Steve Nash (Suns)....................................51.0
30.TJ Ford (Raptors)....................................51.3
31.Mike James (Twolves).............................51.7
32.Brevin Knight (Bobcats)...........................52.6
33.Luke Ridnour (Sonics)...............................52.9

Just for the record

Since I know you Antlerheads like to spend your work days surfing for Red and Green info, you might have noticed a peculiar similarity between the lead in a post I did last night and the lead in a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel story published this morning.

I just want it known that I posted at 10:04 pm last night and according to sportspyder.com, which claims to be realtime, the Journal Sentinel story didn't go up until 12:33 am this morning.

The only reason I bring this up is that I'm sure anyone reading the two pieces would assume Mke Bucks Diary was the copycat, and that would make us look a little tacky.

Well, its not so.

NBA Point Guards: Production Rankings

Yesterday I attempted to rank the NBA's point guards according to their ability to do the things a point guard needs to do (shoot the jump shot, finish around the rim, pass the ball, and handle the rock). Today I rank them according to their production on the court.

To do this I look strictly at what NBA.com calls Eff48. This, I feel, is the ultimate production indicator in basketball.

Comments

If you compare the rankings, the biggest underachiever in the group would be Heat G Jason Williams. He has excellent numbers in the skills department (all of his eFGs are above 50% and his Passer and Ballhandler ratings are above average) but his production is paltry.

Another thing that jumps out: Hornets G Chris Paul is an elite player (as if you needed this to tell you that), both in terms of skills and production.

Finally, these two rankings show Nash is a God. The things he does are simply genius. In fact, if I were an under-athletic hoops player trying to make a high school team, I would turn off ESPN and collect all the video I could on Nash and try to emulate him. He does more with less (physically) than perhaps any player in NBA history.

Anyway, here are the rankings. The average is 22.05 (14 are above average) and the median is 21.51. Both TJ Ford and Mo Williams are below the average and the median.

1.Steve Nash (Suns)............................32.69
2.Allen Iverson (76ers).........................29.06
3.Chris Paul (Hornets)..........................28.30
4.Chauncey Billups (Pistons)..................28.00
5.Jason Kidd (Nets)..............................27.65
6.Gilbert Arenas (Bullets)......................27.42
7.Tony Parker (Spurs)............................25.62
8.Sam Cassell (Clippers).........................24.69
9.Baron Davis (Warriors)........................24.51
10.Mike James (Twolves).......................24.42
11.Jameer Nelson (Magic).......................24.40
12.Brevin Knight (Bobcats)......................23.98
13.Andre Miller (Nuggets).......................23.52
14.Mike Bibby (Kings)..............................22.11
15.Luke Ridnour (Sonics).........................21.64
16.Delonte West (Celtics)..........................21.52
17.Kirk Hinrich (Bulls)...............................21.50
18.Devin Harris (Mavs).............................20.95
19.Jason Terry (Mavs)..............................20.56
20.Stephon Marbury (Knicks)....................20.55
21.Mo Williams (Bucks).............................20.31
22.Tyronn Lue (Hawks)............................19.72
23.Jason Williams (Heat)...........................19.45
24.TJ Ford (Raptors).................................19.37
25.Marcus Banks (?)..................................19.24
26.Chris Duhon (Bulls)...............................18.87
27.Jamaal Tinsley (Pacers)..........................18.04
28.Dam Stoudamire (Grizzlies).....................17.99
29.Smush Parker (Lakers)...........................17.87
30.Rafer Alston (Rockets)..........................17.69
31.Deron Williams (Jazz)............................17.48
32.Seb Telfair (Celtics)................................16.73
33.Damon Jones (Cavs)...............................11.86

Here's a hot one..

Put this under the category of third-hand rumors, but here it is -- WSSP AM radio 1250 Milwaukee (my favorite sports station on the dial) is reporting (or essentially passing on an internet rumor) that Bucks C Jamaal Magliore will be moved to (Indiana?) in some sort of incomprehensible trade exception manuever that would ultimately land the Bucks.... Nuggets PG Andre Miller!

What a move that would be. If this thing isn't mere gossip among former JFK conspiracy nuts, and it actually comes to pass, the Bucks will have moved their two weakest starters, Magliore and TJ Ford, for two huge upgrades -- Charlie Villanueva and Andre Miller.

Stay tuned, hold your breath, and pray its true Green and Red Antlerheads!

Just trade Magliore already

The whole Magliore "Let's Make a Deal" traveling summer carnival is starting to annoy me. Principally because it looks more and more like it will end up being nothing more than a "Garbage Out; Garbage In" trade. Names have been floating and sinking for the past three weeks. Most of them are less than inspiring. Let's quickly review.

1. The Harrington sign-and-trade that I jumped on and got you all pumped up about looks about as dead as disco. That's not going to happen. Sorry.

2. Haven't heard much more of the San Antonio Magliore-for-Berry talk either. That's probably just as well.

3. The most likely scenario emerging, though the Washington Post is refuting it, is a two or three-for-one deal with the Washington Bullets, involving either Jerrod Jeffries or Antonio Daniels or both, plus, most likely, Etan Thomas. If this happens I think the reaction in Bucks Nation will be the same as the reaction to the stink bomb I dropped in seventh grade Art class: bewilderment followed quickly by utter revulsion. Etan Thomas is essentially a carbon copy of Jamaal Magliore (without the superior rebounding-- ouch) and both Jeffries and Daniels are career underperformers (otherwise known as 'Coach and GM Killers'). There are some good qualities to all three but I won't get into those qualities unless and until this thing is finalized.

4. The only possible trade being mentioned that I actually like would be a trade with the Pacers that would bring Danny Granger and a throw in stiff like Stephen Jackson or Jamaal Tinsley to the Bucks. Granger would be a great back-up 3 for the Bucks because he appears to be a very tough defender, an outstanding rebounder for his position, and a good inside scorer. His acquistion would constitute a roster upgrade.

NBA Point Guards: Skills Ranking

I've attempted to rank the NBA point guards according to skills. I have taken five statistical categories from 82games.com and manipulated them to get my rankings. The five categories are: Overall eFG, Jumpshot eFG, Inside eFG, Passer rating, and Ballhandler rating. I multiplied the Passer rating by 5 and the Ballhandler rating by 2.5 so that the average rating number is similar to the average eFG numbers, around 50.

This has a tendency to overrate the guys with good Passer and Ballhandler skills, in other words the "pure" point guards (such as Brevin Knight and Luke Ridnour) and underrate the so-called "scoring" point guards (such as Gilbert Arenas, Jason Terry, and Allen Iverson). Thus, there are significant anamolies in my rankings.

I also have sort of a hodge-podge of point guards. I added some reserves from last season; I think I got all of the starters.

Overall I think it provides a pretty interesting picture of the Association's better true PGs. Here are the rankings with the cumulative scores. Tomorrow I will rank PGs according to Eff48 productivity.

1..Steve Nash (Suns).....................338.30
2..Andre Miller (Nuggets)............320.65
3..Baron Davis (Warriors)............305.15
4..Jason Kidd (Nets).....................300.80
5..Chauncey Billups (Pistons)......292.95
6..Jason Williams (Heat)..............284.60
7..Chris Paul (Hornets)................280.20
8..Brevin Knight (Bobcats)..........278.90
9..Jameer Nelson (Magic)............277.15
10.Allen Iverson (76ers)..............267.10
11.Luke Ridnour (Sonics).............267.00
12.Mike Bibby (Kings)..................256.95
13.Sam Cassell (Clippers).............256.15
14.Stephon Marbury (Knicks).....254.10
15.Tony Parker (Spurs)...............251.90
16.Delonte West (Celtics).............250.60
17.Gilbert Arenas (Bullets)..........248.00
18.Mike James (Raptors)............248.00
19.Kirk Hinrich (Bulls).................246.70
20.Mo Williams (Bucks)..............244.30
21.Chris Duhon (Bulls).................241.30
22.Damon Jones (Cavs)...............239.25
23.Marcus Banks (Twolves).......238.40
24.Jason Terry (Mavericks).......236.55
25.Deron Williams (Jazz).............236.20
26.Smush Parker (Lakers)..........233.75
27.Damon Stoudamire (Grizz)....232.55
28.Rafer Alston (Rockets)...........230.95
29.Seb Telfair (Celts)...................229.40
30.Tyronn Lue (Hawks)..............228.35
31.TJ Ford (Raptors)...................228.10
32.Jamaal Tinsley (Pacers).........220.70
33.Devon Harris (Mavs)..............216.40

Addendum to previous post

I have been asked to elaborate on my last post by ranking each of the point guards according to the six statistics mentioned. Because of limitations with my HTML, I can't do that right now without it looking like a jangled mess. What I can do, for right now, is give the average score in each of the six statistical categories, along with the high score, low score, and TJ Ford's score.

Overall eFG

TJ Ford...................................44.0%
Average..................................48.9%

High:........Steve Nash...........58.4%
Low:........Brevin Knight.......40.1%

Jumper eFG

TJ Ford..................................41.7%
Average.................................45.9%

High:.........Steve Nash..........54.7%
Low:.........Brevin Knight......38.0%

Close eFG

TJ Ford.................................47.7%
Average................................54.5%

High:...........Steve Nash......................70.0%
Low:............Chauncey Billups............43.0%

Inside eFG

TJ Ford..................................47.9%
Average.................................55.1%

High:..............Steve Nash....................70.2%
Low:...............Tyron Lue.....................43.0%

82 games.com Passer Rating

TJ Ford..................................9.3
Average.................................10.3

High.............Andre Miller....................18.9
Low.............Smush Parker..................6.2

82games.com Ballhandler Rating

TJ Ford...................................19.2
Average...................................22.4

High...............Andre Miller...................33.3
Low................Smush Parker................15.7

Statistical Analysis: Ford does nothing well

I'm doing an evaluation of NBA point guards based on statistics provided by the indispensable site 82games.com. I'm using six of their statistics for my analysis: effective field goal percentage ("eFG"), eFG on jump shots only, eFG on close shots only, eFG on inside shots only, their "passer rating", and what I will call their "ballhandler" rating.

In doing this analysis something stunning has revealed itself. Every professional point guard has a good score in at least one of the six categories (by 'good' I mean an eFG above 50%, a passer rating above 10, or a ballhandler rating above 20) except for 3 players: Damon Stoudamire of Memphis, Chris Duhon of Chicago, and former Buck T.J. Ford. And among those 3, indeed among all point guards, the one with the lowest cumulative numbers (adding all five categories together) is TJ Ford. In other words, unlike almost every other PG in the Association, TJ Ford does nothing particularly well.

For example, Jason Terry is an outstanding shooter and penetrator (all of his eFGs are above 50%) however he is a terrible passer (scoring a 5.0) and a very mediocre ballhandler (scoring a 17.5). On the other end of the spectrum is Brevin Knight. He is a terrible shooter (his jump shot eFG is 38.0%), and a so-so penetrator (his close eFG is 45.8%, his inside eFG is the same), but he is an excellent passer (scoring 15.4) and an outstanding ballhandler (31.2). Over and over I have found the same thing: the elite PGs (Nash, Billups) do several things well, while most all of the rest are either good jump shooters, good penetrators, good passers, or good ballhandlers. Except Ford.

He is not a good overall shooter (eFG: 44%). He is not a good jump shooter (eFG: 41.7%). He is merely an okay penetrator (inside eFG: 47.9%). He is not a sure ballhandler (19.2). And, most stunningly, he is a mediocre passer (9.3). He has no speciality.

I'm not saying he is the worst point guard in the Association. But, based upon these critical numbers, I cannot fathom how anyone thinks he is going to ever be a premier point guard.

And comparing him to the incomparable Nash? That ought to be considered basketball blasphemy.

The two faces of Mo Williams

I'm working on a post that will attempt to determine the productive ceiling of Bucks PG Mo Williams. In the process I ran across a statistic that was so mindboggling it deserved its own post.

Mo Williams played in 58 games last year. In those 58 games, the team was 27-31. In the 27 games the team won, Williams had an excellent Eff48 of 25.56. In the 31 games they lost, he had an anemic Eff48 of 15.43. That is a staggering discrepancy in production, unmatched by any other Buck.

The "Mo Williams Barometer" was even more pronounced in the post season. In the one game the Bucks won, Williams had an amazing night, recording an Eff48 of 58.32. In the four games they lost he barely showed up, collectively recording an embarrasing Eff48 of 5.02. 58.32 one game, 5.02 in the other four. How is that even possible?

It almost makes you ask "Will the real Mo Williams please stand up?" I will further explore his maddening inconsistencies in the aforementioned upcoming post.

Larry Harris: Dynamic or Inconstant?

Here's a topic for comment. This weekend I got into an argument with a friend who said he was fed up with Larry Harris and his constant overhauling of the Bucks lineup. He said the Bucks would never be successful until they developed some year-to-year continuity.

I disagreed. I said what I like most about Harris is the very fact that he is humble enough to admit a mistake and smart enough to try to immediately correct it. I said nothing frustrates me more than a general manager who locks himself into a failing player, coach, or scheme simply because he doesn't want to admit error.

I used the example of Ron Wolf. He made many errors. But he was a great general manager because of his ability to recognize those errors and adjust course. He might have lost some face in the process but he spared the organization needless suffering and ultimately kept them on a championship path.

What do you guys think? Is it better for a GM to stick with a plan and ride it out, or adjust course as he sees fit?

Revisiting Magliore for Mason Trade

If this blog stands for anything, its the battle against lazy conventional wisdom. Wherever I detect it, I seek to stamp it out. The latest bit of conventional wisdom that has my spider-sense tingling is the quickly forming consensus that the Bucks got screwed in the 'Magliore for Mason plus a first round pick' trade. I've seen this implied in numerous articles now. Its not true.

I believe Magliore sucks. Yet the trade for him was a good move. Why? Desmond Mason sucks worse, and the player drafted with the Bucks pick, Cedric Simmons, looks for all the world like the second coming of (sound the ominous music)... Marcus Haislip. Indeed, nbadraft.net gave Haislip a much higher grade coming out of college than they are giving Simmons (99 to 90).

Moreover, as the ridiculous scramble for the services of one Joel Pryzbilla illustrates, centers have special value in the NBA, if they can at least show they have some use. And Magliore has shown an ability to rebound. He is therefore a valuable asset for the Bucks.

On the other hand, Desmond Mason was, at his peak, a below average starting forward. He is now past his peak. Last year he posted the worst Eff48 score in the NBA among players who played at least 30 minutes a game: 12.69. I cannot underscore how bad that is. Yes I can: Jiri Welsch had an Eff48 of 14.71.

So, the Bucks traded a severely declining middling forward and a "pick em" draft spot for one of the more valued assets in the NBA, a functional center. How did they lose on the deal?

It DOES look like Christmas

When Bucks Nation came down on the new Bucks logo for looking too "Christmasey", I sort of 'poo-poo'ed them. As usual, they were right, I was wrong.

I just went on Bucks.com to look something up. My God, it looks like a JC Penney's Christmas catalogue! Its so bad I involuntarily started humming "Its Beginning to Look a lot like Christmas". If you don't believe me, check it out.

I still think the jerseys will look cool, though. I'm holding on to that hope, by golly. By the way, Chriscreamer.com is reporting that they will be red with green trim, in line with my earlier speculative posting.

That said, if the website is any indication, I think Bucks Nation should be renamed Christmastown, like the place in that Halloween movie by Tim Burton.

Happy Holidays, Antlerheads... every freakin' day of the year!

Brent Barry for Magliore? I don't know

The latest name to surface in the "Who wants Jamaal?" sweepstakes is San Antonio guard Brent Barry. The San Antonio Express News indicated the Spurs are trying to put together a package for Magliore that features Barry as its centerpiece. Mke Bucks Diary's initial take on this possible move: eh.

Don't get me wrong, we love Brent Barry's game. The problem is, he misplaced it a couple of years ago. And at 34 going on 35, its hard to believe he'll ever find it again.

His career Eff48 is 21.41, okay for a shooting guard (2s generally have the lowest Eff48 scores of any position). Last year he posted a 20.30. His best season was in '01-'02 when he posted a career high 25.67. That's outstanding for a shooting guard; in league with Ray Allen and Michael Redd. However, the last time he produced numbers like that The Sopranos was a good show. Yeah, that long ago.

Particularly troubling is his sharp decline in free throw attempts and free throw percentage. Last year he played in 72 games and attempted only 59 free throws. My Grandpa could get to the line more than that and he's got two artificial knees. Even more shocking is the decline in his free throw accuracy. Prior to last year he was a career 85% thrower. Suddenly he can make only 66%. Those two statistics combine to tell me his legs are gone. That's the only plausible explanation for such a precipitous drop.

And if his legs are gone then his one remaining skill, the three point shot, is soon to follow. But hey, I guess he would still be better than Jiri Welsch.

Villanueva: Shades of a young Terry Cummings

Reading various scouting reports on new Bucks PF Charlie Villanueva, you know who he suddenly reminds me of, both in term of physical tools and basketball skills? A young Terry Cummings.

When the Bucks traded the incomparable Marques Johnson for the young Clipper power forward Terry Cummings they lept off a declining curve and put themselves back on an ascending curve that kept them an elite team through the duration of the 1980s. Cummings, like Villanueva, was not the biggest power forward, and at times he was a bit overmatched on defense, but he had an immense arsenal of offensive moves that few 4s in the Association could match.

If Villanueva truly brings such a package back to Milwaukee he too could be a key part in the reascension of the organization. His athleticism and offensive repetoire is unique amongst NBA power forwards. Yes, he will struggle on defense, and he has to be crafty to be an effective rebounder, but his ability to score the basketball is nearly second to none.

If my analogy holds, he and Michael Redd should make quite a one-two punch for the Red and Green. When do they start selling season tickets?

Is TJ Ford really on the "cusp"?

The spin coming out of Toronto is that TJ Ford is on the cusp of becoming a premier point guard in the NBA. The analogy they use to persuade us that this is true is the career of Phoenix Suns PG Steve Nash.

I don't see it. First of all, Nash was always a good outside shooter. He blossomed into a superstar when he learned to leverage that outside shot to get to the lane. Once in the lane, he has a clever number of unconventional moves he uses to overcome his lack of athleticism and score or assist on baskets. That is not TJ's game.

Ford has never shown the ability to consistently hit jump shots. In fact, the only thing consistent about Ford's outside shooting is its inconsistency. In college his FG percentage hovered around 40%. The same has held true in the professional ranks. He has never shot the basketball at a clip above 41%.

His productivity in college peaked at an Eff48 of 23.19. His overall production in the pros has been pretty consistently in the 19's. He has shown no inkling of becoming a 30+ producer ala' Steve Nash. In fact, if you look at career numbers along with physical characteristics (height, weight, quickness, etc.) Ford appears to be a lesser version of Charlotte PG Brevin Knight.

The collegiate and professional statistics of Knight and Ford are eerily similar. Both have consistently shot around 40% from the field, and neither has ever shown the capacity to break beyond that number. Their assist totals have been eerily similar, too, around 6 or 7 dimes per game. They seem to be almost the same player.

So what does that portend for Mr. Ford? Well, Knight's career Eff48 is 22.31. Since Knight actually outproduced Ford in his first two seasons in the Association (24.51 for Knight, 19.32 for Ford), Ford's ceiling may not even be that high. And its hard to believe Ford will ever put up better numbers in the pros than he put up at Texas. So, I would say Ford's ceiling Eff48 is around 22 or 23, nowhere near the level of production of Steve Nash and certainly not enough to ever earn him the label of a "premier point guard".

In other words, I think the Toronto Raptors management is ladeling out Jamestown Kool-Aid, and everyone in the media is happily drinking it.

Villanueva did not underproduce at UConn

I keep hearing that Bucks PF Charlie Villanueva "underproduced" in his final season at UConn. I don't follow weakass college basketball, so I initially accepted this conventional belief, but all I had to do was a simple computation of the statistics he produced in that final year to put the lie to the whole notion.

Fact is, Villanueva was actually quite productive. Surprisingly, he only played 25 minutes per game, but he made the most of those 25 minutes. His Eff48 score that season was highly respectable 32.18 (suggesting also a very high potential ceiling for CV's professional production).

Consider that the second pick in this year's draft, another power forward named Lamarcus Alridge, had an Eff48 in his final season of only 28.7. And I didn't hear anyone say he unproduced.

Someone explain to me how this myth came to pass. I hate college basketball so I am unfamiliar. From what I gather he was criticized for lacking a "killer instinct" but he ought to get credit for the numbers he put up no matter what his demeanor.

What's with the stupid looking logo?

Why, thank you for asking. Since many more people appear to have discovered this blog, I decided I better get in line with US Copyright and Trademark laws. As such, I couldn't continue to use either of the Bango renderings as my logo and I needed to alter the name a bit.

With the logo, though, I had a dilemma. I wanted to at least conjure a familiarity with the Bucks logos people have grown up with and become accustomed to, but I needed to alter those logos enough to comply with the law. The solution I came up with was to cross "Steroids Bango" and "Cartoon Bango". Imagine, in other words, if the two Bucks logos had an ugly kid, and you have the new Mke Bucks Diary logo (pictured to the right). I can't decide if my Bango is ingenious or utterly stupid, but I'm sticking with it because it is an original piece of artwork that puts clear blue water between this blog and the copyrights held by your Milwaukee Bucks.

You will also notice I have tweaked the official name of the blog. This is to avoid any noncompliance with trademark law. The blog shall now be called "Mke Bucks Diary". As those of you who are frequently fliers will know, "Mke" is the designated airport code for "Milwaukee". So essentially it still reads Milwaukee Bucks Diary without actually reading Milwaukee Bucks Diary.

Why so anal? Well, first of all, I noticed there are almost no other blogs that incorporate the entire team name into their official blog name. And probably for good reason. It is conceivable that someone stumbling upon this blog and seeing the name "Milwaukee Bucks Diary" could believe it was associated with the team, which it is not in anyway. On the other hand, I can't just call it "Bucks Diary", because that's too generic and doesn't really distinguish the blog's subject matter for unfamiliar internet surfers. I think using the airport code name for Milwaukee is the satisfactory way to let people know what this blog is all about without misleading them in any way.

So, that's how I got the new logo and new name. For what its worth.

Comparing relative productivity of Ford vs. Villanueva

Someone requested that I post the "CG" numbers of TJ Ford and Charlie Villanueva. What I was labeling "CG" is actually refered to by NBA.com as "Eff48". Essentially "Eff48" reflects the relative productivity of each player for each minute he is on the court. It computes his positives (points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks) then subtracts his negatives (Fg missed, Ft missed, turnovers) divides that by minutes played and then multiples the result by 48. I think it is the most revealing statistic in basketball.

Anyway, TJ Ford's Eff48 was 19.37. The average Eff48 for starting point guards in the Association was 22.29, and the mean was 21.64. In terms of Eff48 production, then, TJ Ford was in the bottom half of the Association (22nd overall).

Charlie Villanueva's Eff48 was 23.06. Now, I'm running into a bit of a gray area here. Villanueva is slated to play power forward for the Bucks. However, Chris Bosh was, I believe, the starting power forward for the Raptors, according to all the on-line depth charts I have seen. That would have made Villanueva the starting small forward. So I think the proper comparison for Villanueva's 2005-06 numbers is with other starting small forwards. If that is the case, he ranked in the upper half of the Association. The average Eff48 for starting small forwards was 21.83, and the mean was 22.06. By either measure he was amongst the top 12-15 most productive SFs.

Now, if he is considered a power forward, then he is around the average. But I don't think that is fair, because if he did indeed play small forward, he was not afforded the opportunity to accumulate statistics in the same way a power forward could. We'll have to just wait and see how productive he can be at the 4.

Kahn says Raptors came out ahead

In his Ten Things We Learned in the NBA column, foxsports.com writer Mike Kahn says the Raptors' acquisition of TJ Ford provides another piece to the Raptor puzzle and rids Toronto of the underachieving F Charlie Villanueva.

I accept his opinion, but his reasoning in support of it is pretty thin. He says Ford is "in great shape" which is a bizarre observation since no one has ever questioned his fitness (unless he's talking about his spine but is "shape" the right word to use then?). He also says Ford is a "special point guard". That's more or less what you call a 'conclusory argument', i.e. -- "I said it therefore it is so". He offers no supporting evidence to persuade one that Ford is anywhere near special.

He goes on to write that Villanueva surprised people with his productivity as a rookie, but since he underachieved for Coach Jim Calhoun at Connecticut "there's a problem." Okay. So which is it, is he a surprisingly productive player, or is he an underachiever disguised as a surprisingly productive player? Enlighten us, Mr. Kahn. And what the hell difference does it make that he played for Jim Calhoun? That guy didn't distinguish himself as a coach last spring when his vastly more talented UConn team lost to little George Mason.

Oh, and by the way, while he calls Ford the "missing piece" or whatever to the Raptors puzzle, he doesn't really bother himself about what Villanueva might mean to the Bucks. The Bucks must have alot more pieces to fill. Wait, didn't the Bucks make the play-offs last year while the Raptors had one of the worst records in the Association? Pish, don't bother Mr. Kahn with boring details.

Memo to Raptor Nation: Ford is a Lemon

Reaction to the Ford-Villanueva trade is trickling in from the North. Much of it is well-written and well-reasoned, particularly the piece in the excellent Raptor blog known as raptorblog (I need to add a permanent link). Unfortunately, and I'm not being smug and I'm definetly not in the tank for the Bucks when I say this: the consensus forming in Raptor Nation is wrong.

That developing consensus is generally the following: the price for Ford was steep but not unreasonable because he is a point guard and therefore a premium value and, they claim, he is somehow the one missing piece that will make them complete. I say this to my friends up north -- indeed I have said the very same things when TJ looked like he was going to be a Buck for life -- TJ Ford is an annoying player, a poor point guard with production numbers barely surpassing the likes of Tyronn Lue and Chris Duhon, and I can assure you he will never be the missing piece on anyone's team.

A. His Good Points

I like Ford personally. He is a class act, an A+ person. He is an inspirational example of determination and will. And as a player he has good points. He is certainly lightning quick. And he can be fun to watch, especially when he does his coast-to-coast sprint.

However, he is a deeply flawed player on both ends of the floor.

B. His Offensive Shortcomings:

First the offensive end. He has no jump shot. None. So he must use his quickness to attack the basket. However teams have learned that when TJ penetrates the effective strategy is to have the perimeter players stick with the jump shooters and then have the big men foot fake at the little guy. Such tactics completely nullify him because his response will either be to over-dribble or to take a low percentage 'leaner' in reaction to this move.

What about his floor generalship? He is very undisciplined with the basketball, committing far too many foolish turnovers. He takes way too many shots for a player with such a poor eFG%. He is irritatingly short on the intrinsic qualities a leader must have. Indeed, by the end of the season he was driving me crazy with his inappropriately constant smiling and giggling. It struck me as immature.

C. His Defensive Shortcomings

On defense, he sucks. Plain and simple. First, his effort is inconsistent and generally poor. When he picks it up he can harass the opposition's PG effectively -- as long as the ball is out on the perimeter. But unfortunately he rarely displays any commitment at all to defensive intensity. His fatal flaw, however, is something he cannot control: his diminutive size. He will always be at the mercy of average size PGs in the association. Indeed, he could not stay on the floor against the Pistons once Piston coach Flip Saunders realized he could post Ford at will and with anyone he chose to defend.

I've got to cut this short. I'm late for a wedding. Bottom line: even if Villanueva reverts to his destructive collegiate habits, this trade is still an overall plus for the Bucks. Simply ridding ourselves of Ford puts us ahead of the game.

Bucks new target: Atlanta's Harrington?

The Atlanta Journal Constitutional is reporting that the Bucks are among the teams interested in Atlanta Hawks' small forward Al Harrington. Harrington is an unrestricted free agent. Since they are over the NBA's projected salary cap, the Bucks are believed to be pursuing a sign-and-trade to acquire the talented young player with C Jamaal Magliore as the bait.

Harrington, 6'9'' and 245 lbs, joined the NBA directly from high school. He will be entering his ninth professional season this fall. Last year his Eff48 score was 22.41, above average amongst small forwards and a significant improvement over the Bucks incumbent SF Bobby Simmons (19.4).

According to his profile on hoopshype.com, he is an enthusiastic, highly athletic and versatile player. He has a great turnaround jumper and is deadly on the baseline. His only flaw is excessive unselfishness. He can ball.

If Larry Harris gets Harrington he will have completely reinvented the Bucks front line in two brilliant strokes. Gone will be the old slow footed C Jamaal Magliore and his motley crew. In will be the young, lengthy, and athletic Harrington and his would-be running mate PF Charlie Villanueva. The Bucks could be very exciting in 2006-07.

Stay tuned.

Bucks take a Great Leap Forward

Last night GM Larry Harris electrified Bucks Nation when he announced the trade of TJ Ford for Charlie Villanueva. I didn't sleep a wink.

Deadspin.com called this blog "The Diary of a Mad Bucks Fan." The Bucks bring that out in me. But not today. Today I am bursting with Red-and-Green spirit.

This trade has simply blown me away. First, it came from nowhere. That was so great. Second, it did two overwhelmingly positive things for the Milwaukee Bucks. It removed the obvious problem we had at point guard (TJ could be posted at will on defense; on offense he lacked consistency and discipline). And it filled a glaring hole at the power forward position with a young talent. Brilliant.

I'm still in disbelief. I keep thinking David Stern is going to nullify the trade for lopsidedness (ala Bowie Kuhn in 1976).

Why did Toronto do it? It defies basketball logic. You never trade size. You don't trade emerging talent. Above all you do not trade an athletic and effective big man for an underproducing, undersized point guard with a scary medical history. You just don't. They did. Thank you Canada.

Terri Stotts is holding a press conference this morning to discuss the trade.