Does Milwaukee have the right core for the future, or are big moves on the way?
Our NBA Insiders debate the future of the Bucks.
1. What do you foresee and advise for the Bucks this offseason?
Tom Haberstroh, ESPN Insider: Try to trade for talent rather than overspending for free agents. I'd love to see Enes Kanter on the Bucks if OKC decides to dump some money. That should be the Bucks' priority since they'll have to pay a Milwaukee premium to lure talent. I love their Thon Maker pick; it's exactly what a non-glamour market should be doing.
Jeremias Engelmann, ESPN Insider: The Bucks' biggest need is a solid point guard, so I'd try making runs at Mike Conley, Matthew Dellavedova and Jeremy Lin, in that order. Henson is vastly overpaid given his -1.7 RPM and that he's a stat-stuffer, so I'd try to deal him to teams that are desperate for a center.
David Thorpe, ESPN Insider: Empower GM John Hammond, for starters. A team with ambiguous leadership tends to have a murky vision for the future. Then create the vision toward developing Jabari Parker and Giannis Antetokounmpo into their best possible outcomes.
Style of offenses and defenses as well as complementary roster moves built around that vision is a good move forward. Of course 2016 lottery pick Maker has to be considered as well, but I'd focus on those other two first while Maker learns to take baby steps, like rebounding and playing defense.
Bradford Doolittle, ESPN Insider: Now that ground has been broken on the new arena in downtown Milwaukee, it's imperative that the Bucks avoid trying to shortcut their way to contention in time for the venue's opening. (See: Brooklyn Nets.) Of course, it could happen anyway if Antetokounmpo and Parker develop into the NBA's next great 1-2 punch. They are Milwaukee's foundation, so you need to surround them with more shooters and defenders.
Kevin Pelton, ESPN Insider: I'd advise trying to add a wing who can defend point guards and possibly looking for a more mobile center in the mold of former Bucks starter Larry Sanders if there's money left over. I foresee Milwaukee actually going for more of a point guard-type, though probably one who's a good enough shooter to play off the ball.
2. Who are the core Bucks for the future?
Haberstroh: Giannis, Khris Middleton and Parker. I'm bullish on Parker because I don't overreact to a player's struggles in Year 1 after ACL surgery. The guy averaged 18.9 points with about 50 percent shooting after the All-Star break. With Middleton's shooting, Antetokounmpo's playmaking and Parker's scoring, that's a fantastic small-market core.
Engelmann: Definitely Khris Middleton, who turned into one of the plus-minus superstars during the past two seasons. Antetokounmpo seems like a keeper, thanks to good production at a very young age. Parker hasn't been great, but should be given another season or two to prove himself. Everyone else is expendable.
Thorpe: Antetokounmpo, Parker and Maker, plus Greg Monroe for now, sounds about right. This is not a perfect fit simply because of Monroe's years in the league compared to the others, but for now much can be done toward winning and developing with those guys. We don't yet know how Michael Carter-Williams will end up but he needs to be able to fill a role in the system built around those guys.
Doolittle: Jason Kidd is pushing for a positionless roster, and Antetokounmpo and Parker are versatile enough to make that happen. It's all about who you surround them with. You've got to space the floor as both are potentially dynamic players off the bounce. If they improve their shooting, an Antetokounmpo-Parker pick-and-roll/pop foundation would be killer. Middleton completes the foundation.
Pelton: Antetokounmpo, Middleton and Parker. Those are the only three guys I think we can say with confidence will be on the next Milwaukee playoff team. There are other useful players on the roster, but the rest are largely interchangeable.
3. Fact or Fiction: The Bucks are smart to use Giannis Antetokounmpo as the primary point guard.
Haberstroh: Fact. Why not? There's a tendency for teams to fit young players in a traditional box and prioritize order over risk. But Antetokounmpo's turnover rate didn't explode when he became the full-time point guard, which is astounding for someone his age and size.
Engelmann: Fiction. Antetokounmpo recorded a decent number of assists last season, but he doesn't really possess elite ballhandling or passing skills compared to other point guards -- only when you compare him to other players his size. I'd prefer for the Bucks to find another PG to replace Michael Carter-Williams, who obviously isn't great at running the show (8th-worst offensive real plus-minus among point guards).
Thorpe: Fiction. That's not to say he can't be a point guard in games. But freeing him up to fill lanes on the break is a great way to get him easy buckets and stretch the defense vertically when trying to defend him.
I'd like to see him push the ball himself when he gets a rebound (which can happen more if he is defending bigger guys who are slashing more or trying to rebound themselves), but race the lanes when he doesn't rather than look for an outlet pass. Using him smartly as a point guard rather than solely is the best answer.
Doolittle: Antetokounmpo has the court vision and innate unselfishness to run the point, and putting the ball in his hands activates his immense across-the-board skill set. For it to work, though, he needs to avoid becoming a ball stopper and, even more crucially, he needs to improve his shooting enough to make teams pay for ducking under ball screens.
Pelton: Fact. The results from the second half of last season spoke for themselves. Playing Antetokounmpo at the point means his non-shooting creates fewer spacing issues, and it's a lot easier to find complementary role players than it is a solution at point guard.
4. What should the Bucks do about Greg Monroe?
Haberstroh: I would try one more season to see what they have with a healthy Parker, but it's not a good sign that just about every lineup with Miles Plumlee instead of Monroe performed way better at the end of the year. If I'm Hammond, I flaunt him at the trade deadline if they still can't defend with him back there.
Engelmann: Monroe isn't a great player, as his RPM was 0.7 last season, but at $17 million per season and given that he's only 26, he isn't horrendously overpaid. Obviously the Bucks should go for it if they're offered a good deal, but that seems unlikely. For now, they should probably keep him.
Thorpe: Be open to anything. Most importantly though is to help him play better and try to win games. Nothing builds value better than that, if indeed it makes sense to move him it will be because of the offer. I'd suggest embracing him fully with the idea that the franchise will do all it can to help him have a career year.
Doolittle: You can't say that Milwaukee didn't get who it thought it was getting. Monroe's per-minute numbers are some of the most consistent in the league. He just didn't fit with the Bucks and since he's not going to change, either you have to mold the roster around him or move him for shooters and/or defenders. The latter seems the obvious choice.
Pelton: I'd look to move him if the Bucks can get anything of value in return, since I don't think Monroe would be satisfied coming off the bench and he doesn't fit well with Milwaukee's starting five. The Monroe-Parker combination doesn't have enough shooting or defense to be ideal. That said, if Monroe was open to a full-time reserve role, I think he can anchor a second unit with his scoring.
5. If the Bucks were a stock and you were looking ahead three years, would you buy, sell or hold?
Haberstroh: Buy. Have you seen Giannis Antetokounmpo play basketball? I'm a fan of that nucleus, and who knows what happens with Thon Maker? I can't name five teams that have a higher ceiling on their youth. After a down year, I think they take a nice bounce-back next season and beyond.
Engelmann: Buy. The Bucks' top five players in minutes played were all 25 years or younger last season, so it's extremely likely that some of them -- most likely Parker and Antetokounmpo -- improve significantly during the next few years. If they do indeed improve, and Milwaukee can keep them long term, it's likely the Bucks will be one of the better Eastern Conference teams for years to come.
Thorpe: I'd buy, in small amounts. I love their young talent and I think the city is far more interesting than people outside of the Midwest understand -- and the franchise is truly part of a basketball culture there.
I do worry about the lack of clarity at the top, as that's rarely a positive sign for future growth of a company (or a team). In a year, with maybe one more smart move, this team could be where Toronto is right now, only more talented at the top of the roster. Jason Kidd, all eyes are on you, for sure.
Doolittle: Buy. Outstanding young talent. Potential marquee stars in Antetokounmpo and Parker who really seem to have embraced the city. Owners who, while still learning, are hell-bent on building a cutting-edge operation and a new facility on the way that -- as part of a larger economic development -- should energize a fatigued fan base. What's not to like?
Pelton: Hold. There were certainly positive signs from the core in the second half of last season. However, generally speaking full-season results tend to be more predictive going forward. Because of Antetokounmpo's move to point guard and Parker's recovery from ACL surgery, the Bucks could well be an exception to that rule. I'd like more time before coming to that conclusion, however.