Milwaukee Bucks Roundtable: Reflecting on the Conference Finals loss
By Adam McGee
2. How did you think the Bucks were defensively in this series, and what, if anything, would you have liked to see them do differently?
Dan Larsen (@DanLarsen34): With the exception of Game 4, Milwaukee was okay on the defensive end the floor.
The Bucks did, particularly in Games 5 and 6, what they had done throughout most of the season. They shut down Toronto’s ability to score inside. However, what ultimately ended up burning them, was Toronto unbelievable production from three.
In particular, they got a historic performance out of Fred VanVleet, a guy who until Game 4 of the Eastern Conference Finals had been WORSE shooting the ball throughout the entire playoffs than Eric Bledsoe was in the Conference Finals. Milwaukee was probably going to get burned for leaving so many open threes at some point, but no one could have foreseen WHO would do it for Toronto to beat them.
A few criticisms can be lobbied at their defense, however. First, they overreacted to Kawhi Leonard hitting shots by overhelping on him late in games. The doubles he created opened up the shooting opportunities from distance for VanVleet and Kyle Lowry, who was also incredible from range throughout the series. It also created great opportunities inside when Toronto kept moving the ball.
Milwaukee also got burned a few times by making poor switching decisions. Rather than switching selectively, the Bucks were switching everything at times in the fourth quarters of Games 5 and 6. This created favorable matchups for Leonard and others, leading to either Leonard hitting a step back jumper over Brook Lopez, or a double team that resulted in a good look for someone else.
The Bucks were also burned by their inability to rebound consistently late in games. Too many times, the Bucks gave up second chance baskets because they were beaten to a loose ball or a rebound. That was inexcusable execution for a team that was the league’s best rebounding team during the regular season.
Theo Konstantellos (@theokon7): Defensively, the Bucks were fine overall in this series as they protected the paint as usual and limited Raptors to a 54.5 percent TS% and 107.3 ORTG despite the fact that Raptors shot an incredible 37.4 percent from three point range. Yes, one can argue that the Bucks gave up a few too many good looks from three-point range but the fact remains that luck goes into it as well.
Fred VanVleet in particular went absolutely berserk from three-point range shooting 57.1 percent for the series and 82.4 percent in the last three games. So of course there is no denying that some small sample size luck goes into it as well.
Jordan Treske (@JordanTreske): If anything, the Bucks’ defense was their saving grace as to why they hung in the series after their Game 2 blowout. To say the Bucks didn’t make adjustments on that end of the floor would be a misguided statement and it was arguably their change to switch almost everything that resulted in their worst defensive performance, that coming in Game 4.
Where the Bucks increasingly didn’t make the necessary three-point looks to win the series, Toronto did, Fred Van Vleet and Norman Powell in particular. That may seem reductive in the grand scope of looking how the series shook out, but it’s a significant reason why the Bucks are sitting at home at this point.
Adam McGee (@AdamMcGee11): There can be no real complaints about defensive strategy, as the Bucks had success in their usual dropping scheme, as well as in bursts when they switched. Any problems on that end came down to execution.
Panicked closeouts on Marc Gasol stick in my mind, as do some misguided gambles and overhelping from Giannis, Eric and Khris, in particular. Otherwise, for as good as Kawhi was in the series, he largely was held well below his shooting averages.