Milwaukee Bucks 98, San Antonio Spurs 112: the Early Edition
After blowing a substantial first half lead late in the second quarter, the Spurs regained control during the third and cruised to 14 point victory over Milwaukee Bucks, a franchise which has given us an inexplicable amount of trouble during the Tim Duncan era.
A quick glance at the traditional box score paints a muddled portrait of the game. While we shot well from the field (51.3%) and beyond the arc (47.6%), the Bucks did as well (49.4% and 43.8% respectively). Both teams dished the same number of dimes (24) but Milwaukee won the turnover battle by a wide margin: the Spurs committed 16 turnovers compared to the Bucks 9. This is probably the game’s most surprisingly statistic given that, according to John Hollinger, the Spurs are 5th in the league in turnover ratio while the Bucks are 24th.
On the other hand, the free throw and rebounding columns make it quite clear as to why the Spurs won tonight’s game.
Milwaukee not only failed to take advantage of their trips to the line (9-14), but they also found their way to the charity stripe far less often than San Antonio (22-26). Add on the fact that the Spurs out-rebounded the Bucks 46 to 29 and you’ve stumbled across the reasons why we won the game so comfortably.
The game’s most notable performances came from Tim Duncan, George Hill, and Matt Bonner. (Keith Bogans gets an honorable mention).
Honestly, at this point, when Tim Duncan puts up a 20-10 performance (24-12 to be exact) I hardly know what to say. Pundits can prophesy his demise til their faces turns red. The convenient thing about predicting a player’s drop-off is that your prognostication is sure to come true eventually. In the meantime, I’m more than happy to watch Duncan be one of the league’s savviest, most consistent post presences.
There are lots of good players in the NBA. They just don't look that good when they play the Spurs.
George Hill played well on the offensive end but, unsurprisingly, his most notable accomplishments came on the defensive end. He held the meteoric Brandon Jennings to a 12 point, 6-21 night (with a little help from Tony Parker along the way). Hill’s length and quickness allows him to have the best of both worlds on the defensive end. While most players have to commit to denying the shot or cutting off the drive, Hill can do both. He consistently pressured Jennings near the top of the arc and, because of his aggressiveness, got taken off the dribble quite often. But unlike many of the players who have stood toe-to-toe with Jennings, Hill had the speed to recover and contest his shot, blocking two of his layups and altering several others.
Bonner shot the lights out. At this point none of us necessarily expect that, but we certainly aren’t surprised by it. What we continue to be surprised by is when Bonner reliably cleans the glass and aggressively contests interior shots. Personally, I’m starting to wonder why.
Bonner is averaging 5 rebounds a game this season, up from 3.6 last season (meanwhile his minutes per game are down). And although his physical limitations are ever present, his defensive commitment has been more consistent this season. I tend to think that Bonner deserves less burn because I don’t believe it is as necessary to have a big who spreads the floor. But, despite the criticism he receives, Bonner is slowly but steadily making a case for why he deserves to be on that court.
