Is John Henson A Core Milwaukee Bucks Player?

There are lots of buzz-words surrounding the Milwaukee Bucks in anticipation for the 2015-16 season. Own the future, destination city, potential, new arena, core player, new uniforms, etc. No terms are more “buzzy” than core player.

Before determining if John Henson is a core player, let’s define what a core player is.

More from Bucks News

Generally speaking a team’s “core” is a handful of guys with above-average talent, long-terms contracts, and regarded as indispensable to the team.

The Milwaukee Bucks core is Giannis Antetokounmpo, Jabari Parker, and Khris Middleton. One could make a strong argument for Greg Monroe, but with a player option after the 2016-17 season fans have no idea how long he may stay with the Bucks.

You can also make the case for Michael Carter-Williams, but with the PG depth in the NBA right now it’s hard to see his impact on the Bucks as an indispensable contributor. Remember, the Bucks dished Brandon Knight (who was the first man out on the All-Star team) and kept ticking.

Then there comes the case of John Henson–currently the Milwaukee Bucks longest-tenured player.

The short answer is no, John Henson is not a core player for the Milwaukee Bucks. He’s a great bench player and good in a spot-starting role. He also has reasonable durability (he’s appeared in at least 63 games in each of his first three seasons). But a core player? Not quite.

Last season many fans considered Larry Sanders a core guy, but the Buck’s beat kept on rolling despite losing Sander’s talents.

The first aspect of a true core player is that player’s importance to the team. Last season many fans considered Larry Sanders a core guy, but the Buck’s beat kept on rolling despite losing Sander’s talents.

Ask yourself this: If John Henson were to be traded tomorrow would the Bucks future title hopes suffer? Hell, would his absence cost the Bucks even a game or two this season? Barring injury to Monroe, Henson’s absence would cause limited (if any) damage.

Despite his affable personality, the numbers show a player who hasn’t evolved his game since entering the league.

He’s not strong at the rim. He still favors the gather-dribble before going up strong. He still leans heavily on the lefty-hook (his trademark move, of course). And has no real back to the basket game outside of sweeping to his left.

There are questions about his rebounding ability, too.

Last season he averaged 4.7 rebounds per game, down from his 7.1 in 2013-14. Now, 4.7 RPG over 18.3 minutes per game isn’t a horrible average; but Chris Kaman managed to snag 6.5 RPG in 18.9 minutes per game. Chris-freaking-Kaman!

Henson finished last season tied for 37th in rebounding among centers along with Kendrick Perkins and Kelly Olynyk. Meanwhile, Zaza Pachulia (no vacuum cleaner himself) managed to rank 25th among centers with 6.8 rebounds per game.

So he can’t play offense and he can’t grab a rebound. So why again, would John Henson considered a borderline core player?

His defense. Oh my, his defense.

With a staggering 7″5″ wingspan John Henson was able to average two blocks per game in 2014-15–fourth in the league among centers and FIRST regardless of position in blocks per 48 minutes, with 5.28.

Here he is putting that stringy body to use against the Charlotte Hornets.

His defensive instincts aren’t the greatest the NBA has ever seen (he tends to passively watch the action instead of moving his feet). But whatever he lacks in instinct he makes up for in length. Notice how he camps out in the paint before soaring from out of nowhere to reject an attempt–relying on length rather than position to make the play.

That’s why fans are torn when it comes to John Henson.

On one hand you have a guy who hasn’t progressed offensively during his time in the league. On the other hand you have an otherworldly lengthy bench guy who by all indications appears to be satisfied with his role (a rarity in today’s NBA).

But how important is John Henson’s defense to this Bucks team? Not very.

With solid two-way players like Giannis Antetokounmpo and Khris Middleton (4.0 and 3.5 defensive win shares), Milwaukee’s defense was stellar from the outset of last season–regardless of John Henson’s contributions.

Henson finished the season with 2.4 defensive win shares, a half game behind the 2.9 DWS of Zaza Pachulia (who isn’t known for his defense).

This begs the question–how can you consider Henson a core player if his calling card trait doesn’t give the team something special? The answer is simple: you can’t.

On a different, more defensively challenged team, Henson could very easily be considered a core player.

On a different, more defensively challenged team (ahem, Toronto), Henson could very easily be considered a core player.

But on this Milwaukee Bucks team Henson’s defense doesn’t give the team something special–they already have defense. He gives energy and effort, sure–but so did Dan Gadzuric. All Bucks fans old enough to drive remember how that one turned out.

John Henson is the type of guy you love to have on your team. He plays with energy and routinely provides highlight-reel plays. But as far as core guys go? John Henson isn’t in that group. He’s not indispensable enough. His game lacks diversity and his offensive ability is stagnant.

Unfortunately he will likely command a contract in the ball park of eight to ten million a year–a contract that the Bucks can’t afford with a huge deal for Giannis Antetokounmpo and a decision on Michael Carter-Williams coming up.

A breakout year notwithstanding, John Henson will remain on the outside looking in when it comes to core players.

Next: Hiding Greg Monroe: Why The Milwaukee Bucks Defense WIll Be Fine

More from Behind the Buck Pass