Time To Panic? I Think So

[Donoghus]

If I told you at the beginning of the year that Boston would win over 68% of its games with 11 to play, I think we'd all take that as that is a 55 or 56 win season.

The really unsustainable start has really caused much of this panic as Boston has come back to the mean of where it always should have been i.e. a mid 50's win team.

If you had asked us if we would start hot and then look like similar to the team from the 1st half of last year, I don't think many would take that deal.

Right.  It’s not the record, it’s the level of play.

Since Boston started 21-5 it is 28-18, which is basically a 50 win pace and would put Boston as the 5th seed only 1 game behind Cleveland for the 4th seed.  Since the start of February, Boston is actually winning a greater pace than the Cavs are on the season.

In other words, Boston's level of play is that of a top 4 or 5 team since it started out on fire.  I just don't buy the idea that Boston's level of play is not there.  Sure a game here or there they blow it, but that happens every year to basically any team that is not one of the best teams ever.

Last year’s Finals team is playing like the 7th or 8th best team.  I’m not sure that that’s worthy of celebration.

and if Middleton doesn't get hurt, Boston loses in the 2nd round last year.  Boston was not the 2nd best team in the sport last year.  Acting like they were, has been the problem on this blog all year.  Boston is a very good team, but they aren't an elite team and haven't been since KG got hurt.  That is the reality.

Sad, but true.

I don't think this is true at all.  Boston was the best team in the NBA for around 4 months last season, and the first 25 games or so of this season.  There was nothing flukeish about the Finals run.

This is true.

Milwaukee with Middleton was better than Boston last year, but that doesn't mean Boston's finals run was a fluke.  Boston was a very good team, but Milwaukee was simply better if they were at full strength.  That is all opinion since they didn't play at full strength (or at least what the playoff full strength would have been) at all last year.  It ended up as a close 7 game series in which Milwaukee didn't have their 2nd best scorer and shot generator at all.  I think Middleton would have more than made up the ground in a close series.  Giannis just had to carry too much of the offensive load that series (Holiday is much more a 3rd offensive option in his style of play) and Giannis was worn down by the end of games 6 and 7 especially, but basically in every game.  Milwaukee only won 2 4th quarters in the series, game 1 by 4 and game 5 by 12, the other 4th quarters were all won by Boston by 6, 11, 15, 1, and 13.  The game generally got away from the Bucks down the stretch because Giannis wasn't quite as good as he got tired, and Giannis being that much better than everyone else is how the Bucks were winning those games.  Sure, maybe Middleton being there has a ripple effect and Boston still wins the series, I just don't think that happens as the Bucks in my view were better than Boston, just as they are this year as well (if they can get Middleton up to around 70% of what he was preinjury).

If.

It's just a speculative hypothetical and nothing else.

[Phantom255x]

If I told you at the beginning of the year that Boston would win over 68% of its games with 11 to play, I think we'd all take that as that is a 55 or 56 win season.

The really unsustainable start has really caused much of this panic as Boston has come back to the mean of where it always should have been i.e. a mid 50's win team.

If you had asked us if we would start hot and then look like similar to the team from the 1st half of last year, I don't think many would take that deal.

Right.  It’s not the record, it’s the level of play.

Since Boston started 21-5 it is 28-18, which is basically a 50 win pace and would put Boston as the 5th seed only 1 game behind Cleveland for the 4th seed.  Since the start of February, Boston is actually winning a greater pace than the Cavs are on the season.

In other words, Boston's level of play is that of a top 4 or 5 team since it started out on fire.  I just don't buy the idea that Boston's level of play is not there.  Sure a game here or there they blow it, but that happens every year to basically any team that is not one of the best teams ever.

Last year’s Finals team is playing like the 7th or 8th best team.  I’m not sure that that’s worthy of celebration.

and if Middleton doesn't get hurt, Boston loses in the 2nd round last year.  Boston was not the 2nd best team in the sport last year.  Acting like they were, has been the problem on this blog all year.  Boston is a very good team, but they aren't an elite team and haven't been since KG got hurt.  That is the reality.

Sad, but true.

I don't think this is true at all.  Boston was the best team in the NBA for around 4 months last season, and the first 25 games or so of this season.  There was nothing flukeish about the Finals run.

This is true.

Milwaukee with Middleton was better than Boston last year, but that doesn't mean Boston's finals run was a fluke.  Boston was a very good team, but Milwaukee was simply better if they were at full strength.  That is all opinion since they didn't play at full strength (or at least what the playoff full strength would have been) at all last year.  It ended up as a close 7 game series in which Milwaukee didn't have their 2nd best scorer and shot generator at all.  I think Middleton would have more than made up the ground in a close series.  Giannis just had to carry too much of the offensive load that series (Holiday is much more a 3rd offensive option in his style of play) and Giannis was worn down by the end of games 6 and 7 especially, but basically in every game.  Milwaukee only won 2 4th quarters in the series, game 1 by 4 and game 5 by 12, the other 4th quarters were all won by Boston by 6, 11, 15, 1, and 13.  The game generally got away from the Bucks down the stretch because Giannis wasn't quite as good as he got tired, and Giannis being that much better than everyone else is how the Bucks were winning those games.  Sure, maybe Middleton being there has a ripple effect and Boston still wins the series, I just don't think that happens as the Bucks in my view were better than Boston, just as they are this year as well (if they can get Middleton up to around 70% of what he was preinjury).

If.

It's just a speculative hypothetical and nothing else.

What if that's incorrect 

[Moranis]

If I told you at the beginning of the year that Boston would win over 68% of its games with 11 to play, I think we'd all take that as that is a 55 or 56 win season.

The really unsustainable start has really caused much of this panic as Boston has come back to the mean of where it always should have been i.e. a mid 50's win team.

If you had asked us if we would start hot and then look like similar to the team from the 1st half of last year, I don't think many would take that deal.

Right.  It’s not the record, it’s the level of play.

Since Boston started 21-5 it is 28-18, which is basically a 50 win pace and would put Boston as the 5th seed only 1 game behind Cleveland for the 4th seed.  Since the start of February, Boston is actually winning a greater pace than the Cavs are on the season.

In other words, Boston's level of play is that of a top 4 or 5 team since it started out on fire.  I just don't buy the idea that Boston's level of play is not there.  Sure a game here or there they blow it, but that happens every year to basically any team that is not one of the best teams ever.

Last year’s Finals team is playing like the 7th or 8th best team.  I’m not sure that that’s worthy of celebration.

and if Middleton doesn't get hurt, Boston loses in the 2nd round last year.  Boston was not the 2nd best team in the sport last year.  Acting like they were, has been the problem on this blog all year.  Boston is a very good team, but they aren't an elite team and haven't been since KG got hurt.  That is the reality.

Sad, but true.

I don't think this is true at all.  Boston was the best team in the NBA for around 4 months last season, and the first 25 games or so of this season.  There was nothing flukeish about the Finals run.

This is true.

Milwaukee with Middleton was better than Boston last year, but that doesn't mean Boston's finals run was a fluke.  Boston was a very good team, but Milwaukee was simply better if they were at full strength.  That is all opinion since they didn't play at full strength (or at least what the playoff full strength would have been) at all last year.  It ended up as a close 7 game series in which Milwaukee didn't have their 2nd best scorer and shot generator at all.  I think Middleton would have more than made up the ground in a close series.  Giannis just had to carry too much of the offensive load that series (Holiday is much more a 3rd offensive option in his style of play) and Giannis was worn down by the end of games 6 and 7 especially, but basically in every game.  Milwaukee only won 2 4th quarters in the series, game 1 by 4 and game 5 by 12, the other 4th quarters were all won by Boston by 6, 11, 15, 1, and 13.  The game generally got away from the Bucks down the stretch because Giannis wasn't quite as good as he got tired, and Giannis being that much better than everyone else is how the Bucks were winning those games.  Sure, maybe Middleton being there has a ripple effect and Boston still wins the series, I just don't think that happens as the Bucks in my view are better than Boston, just as they are this year as well (if they can get Middleton up to around 70% of what he was preinjury).

Why don't you ever take Timelord's absence into account when talking about that series?

My opinion:  if we have a fully healthy Timelord and they have a fully healthy Middleton, we win.

That's unrealistic, though, because there was never going to be a fully healthy version of either player.  So, give me a rough approximation of 2023 Middleton and 2023 Timelord in that series, and we still win.

The only way we don't win is fully healthy Middleton plays, Timelord is absent in games 4 through 7.  Under that odd scenario, I think you're correct.

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

[Moranis]

If I told you at the beginning of the year that Boston would win over 68% of its games with 11 to play, I think we'd all take that as that is a 55 or 56 win season.

The really unsustainable start has really caused much of this panic as Boston has come back to the mean of where it always should have been i.e. a mid 50's win team.

If you had asked us if we would start hot and then look like similar to the team from the 1st half of last year, I don't think many would take that deal.

Right.  It’s not the record, it’s the level of play.

Since Boston started 21-5 it is 28-18, which is basically a 50 win pace and would put Boston as the 5th seed only 1 game behind Cleveland for the 4th seed.  Since the start of February, Boston is actually winning a greater pace than the Cavs are on the season.

In other words, Boston's level of play is that of a top 4 or 5 team since it started out on fire.  I just don't buy the idea that Boston's level of play is not there.  Sure a game here or there they blow it, but that happens every year to basically any team that is not one of the best teams ever.

Last year’s Finals team is playing like the 7th or 8th best team.  I’m not sure that that’s worthy of celebration.

and if Middleton doesn't get hurt, Boston loses in the 2nd round last year.  Boston was not the 2nd best team in the sport last year.  Acting like they were, has been the problem on this blog all year.  Boston is a very good team, but they aren't an elite team and haven't been since KG got hurt.  That is the reality.

Sad, but true.

I don't think this is true at all.  Boston was the best team in the NBA for around 4 months last season, and the first 25 games or so of this season.  There was nothing flukeish about the Finals run.

This is true.

Milwaukee with Middleton was better than Boston last year, but that doesn't mean Boston's finals run was a fluke.  Boston was a very good team, but Milwaukee was simply better if they were at full strength.  That is all opinion since they didn't play at full strength (or at least what the playoff full strength would have been) at all last year.  It ended up as a close 7 game series in which Milwaukee didn't have their 2nd best scorer and shot generator at all.  I think Middleton would have more than made up the ground in a close series.  Giannis just had to carry too much of the offensive load that series (Holiday is much more a 3rd offensive option in his style of play) and Giannis was worn down by the end of games 6 and 7 especially, but basically in every game.  Milwaukee only won 2 4th quarters in the series, game 1 by 4 and game 5 by 12, the other 4th quarters were all won by Boston by 6, 11, 15, 1, and 13.  The game generally got away from the Bucks down the stretch because Giannis wasn't quite as good as he got tired, and Giannis being that much better than everyone else is how the Bucks were winning those games.  Sure, maybe Middleton being there has a ripple effect and Boston still wins the series, I just don't think that happens as the Bucks in my view were better than Boston, just as they are this year as well (if they can get Middleton up to around 70% of what he was preinjury).

Dude, I know Middleton is a Celtics killer and a fantastic player, but at the same time your posts about him when comparing Milwaukee and Boston make it sound like he's Michael Jordan 

Yeah if they are fully healthy the Bucks probably are the best team in the NBA, but isn't that kind of true for other teams? Like if Boston was fully healthy with Timelord are we sure MIL is "definitely" better by a big margin? Sometimes injuries/durability does become a factor.

Middleton's done better and found a bit of a groove lately but he's still not the same guy as pre-injury. We can also say the same about Timelord too, and I think a fully healthy Timelord is one of the best players between both teams (maybe not Top-5, but 6 or 7 and not far behind Middleton)

Who said anything about a big margin?  But yeah, Milwaukee last year with a healthy Middleton is better than Boston with a healthy Williams.  You take any teams 2nd best offensive player off their team in the middle of a playoff series and see how they recover.  And despite all of that, Milwaukee still almost beat Boston.  It was a close series, you put both teams at full health i.e. add the 2nd best player from the Bucks and the 5th best player from the Celtics back and I do think the outcome is different than what we saw.  Probably Milwaukee in 6 with them actually closing it out on their home floor instead of getting blown out.

[Roy H.]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

[Moranis]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

[Roy H.]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

[Moranis]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

[Roy H.]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

Nope.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=holidjr01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id2=middlkh01&p2yrfrom=2022

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Based upon your own posting history, you've got to concede this one, right?

[Moranis]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

Nope.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=holidjr01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id2=middlkh01&p2yrfrom=2022

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Based upon your own posting history, you've got to concede this one, right?

I know the numbers, greater impact on winning and better player aren't the same thing.  I mean Curry had significantly better on/off numbers than Durant during their time together, but I don't think anyone would say Curry was better than Durant.  Heck on our team, Brown's on/off numbers aren't good at all (as we all know), but I would never suggest he isn't Boston's 2nd best player. 

Last year, Middleton was Milwaukee's 2nd best player, though I do think because of the defense and passing you could easily argue that Holiday was a more important or impactful player.  They needed Middleton's shot creation though badly in the series with Boston.  It was readily apparent that Milwaukee needed someone else that could create for himself and others, and that Holiday just wasn't good enough in that role.  Holiday is an excellent 3rd man on offense, but he isn't a 2nd man on offense type player.  If Milwaukee loses this year, it will be for that reason as well (assuming they don't have a major injury of course).  They need Middleton to get back to at least 70% of what he was pre-injury because they need that guy.  Holiday has done a bit more this year, and I do like the addition of Crowder, but Crowder is a 4th or 5th option on offense type part-time player, not a full-time 2nd or 3rd.  He can't make up the difference that not having Middleton is.  Even without Middleton at at least 70%, Milwaukee could still win the title because Giannis is just that good, but if they don't win, it will likely be for that reason.

[Roy H.]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

Nope.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=holidjr01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id2=middlkh01&p2yrfrom=2022

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Based upon your own posting history, you've got to concede this one, right?

I know the numbers, greater impact on winning and better player aren't the same thing.  I mean Curry had significantly better on/off numbers than Durant during their time together, but I don't think anyone would say Curry was better than Durant.  Heck on our team, Brown's on/off numbers aren't good at all (as we all know), but I would never suggest he isn't Boston's 2nd best player. 

Last year, Middleton was Milwaukee's 2nd best player, though I do think because of the defense and passing you could easily argue that Holiday was a more important or impactful player.  They needed Middleton's shot creation though badly in the series with Boston.  It was readily apparent that Milwaukee needed someone else that could create for himself and others, and that Holiday just wasn't good enough in that role.  Holiday is an excellent 3rd man on offense, but he isn't a 2nd man on offense type player.  If Milwaukee loses this year, it will be for that reason as well (assuming they don't have a major injury of course).  They need Middleton to get back to at least 70% of what he was pre-injury because they need that guy.  Holiday has done a bit more this year, and I do like the addition of Crowder, but Crowder is a 4th or 5th option on offense type part-time player, not a full-time 2nd or 3rd.  He can't make up the difference that not having Middleton is.  Even without Middleton at at least 70%, Milwaukee could still win the title because Giannis is just that good, but if they don't win, it will likely be for that reason.

The guy who puts up better numbers, plays (much) better defense and has a much bigger impact on winning isn't the better player?

[SHAQATTACK]

It’s all a magnificent setup strategy by coach Mazz , taking the C’s out of the rest of the leagues sights .

Then lowering the boom at playoff time. 

[slamtheking]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

Nope.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=holidjr01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id2=middlkh01&p2yrfrom=2022

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Based upon your own posting history, you've got to concede this one, right?

I know the numbers, greater impact on winning and better player aren't the same thing.  I mean Curry had significantly better on/off numbers than Durant during their time together, but I don't think anyone would say Curry was better than Durant.  Heck on our team, Brown's on/off numbers aren't good at all (as we all know), but I would never suggest he isn't Boston's 2nd best player. 

Last year, Middleton was Milwaukee's 2nd best player, though I do think because of the defense and passing you could easily argue that Holiday was a more important or impactful player.  They needed Middleton's shot creation though badly in the series with Boston.  It was readily apparent that Milwaukee needed someone else that could create for himself and others, and that Holiday just wasn't good enough in that role.  Holiday is an excellent 3rd man on offense, but he isn't a 2nd man on offense type player.  If Milwaukee loses this year, it will be for that reason as well (assuming they don't have a major injury of course).  They need Middleton to get back to at least 70% of what he was pre-injury because they need that guy.  Holiday has done a bit more this year, and I do like the addition of Crowder, but Crowder is a 4th or 5th option on offense type part-time player, not a full-time 2nd or 3rd.  He can't make up the difference that not having Middleton is.  Even without Middleton at at least 70%, Milwaukee could still win the title because Giannis is just that good, but if they don't win, it will likely be for that reason.

The guy who puts up better numbers, plays (much) better defense and has a much bigger impact on winning isn't the better player?

it's called "Moving those Goalposts!" baby   

[Moranis]

Boston was 1-2 with Timelord in that series and 3-1 in the games he didn't play.  He obviously wasn't at full strength, but I don't think he would have made nearly as much a difference as Middleton would have.  It was a close 7 game series after all.  Middleton was better than Rob and more important to Milwaukee's success than Rob was to Boston's.  That isn't some crazy statement and given how close the series is, it seems quite logical to assume that with both teams at full health that Milwaukee would have won the series.  The Middleton and Rob comparison is more like Brook (or Portis) vs. Jaylen i.e. really no comparison.  One teams loss is significantly greater than the others.  In a close series, that matters a lot.

I think the stats back up that we were a much better team with a healthy Timelord than we were without him.  Hobbled Timelord wasn't super impactful, just like hobbled Middleton wouldn't have been.  But full-strength Boston vs. full-strength Milwaukee?  I'm taking Boston.

I guess in fairness, we did lose an April regular season game by 6 points, in which the Bucks were at full strength and we were missing Tatum, Timelord and Horford.

Sure and Christmas without Horford, or the OT win Boston had where Giannis and Middleton were out (as was Brown).  Boston won the only game the only starter out was Brook Lopez, but it was mid-December before all the trade deadline moves by both teams. 

So in other words two relatively matched teams.  In that, I'm taking the team adding its 2nd best player vs. the one adding its 5th best player to a series that went 7 games where the 2nd best player didn't play at all and the 5th best player managed 3 of the 7.

Middleton hasn't been Milwaukee's second best player in awhile, for whatever it's worth.

he was last year.

Nope.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=holidjr01&p1yrfrom=2022&player_id2=middlkh01&p2yrfrom=2022

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Based upon your own posting history, you've got to concede this one, right?

I know the numbers, greater impact on winning and better player aren't the same thing.  I mean Curry had significantly better on/off numbers than Durant during their time together, but I don't think anyone would say Curry was better than Durant.  Heck on our team, Brown's on/off numbers aren't good at all (as we all know), but I would never suggest he isn't Boston's 2nd best player. 

Last year, Middleton was Milwaukee's 2nd best player, though I do think because of the defense and passing you could easily argue that Holiday was a more important or impactful player.  They needed Middleton's shot creation though badly in the series with Boston.  It was readily apparent that Milwaukee needed someone else that could create for himself and others, and that Holiday just wasn't good enough in that role.  Holiday is an excellent 3rd man on offense, but he isn't a 2nd man on offense type player.  If Milwaukee loses this year, it will be for that reason as well (assuming they don't have a major injury of course).  They need Middleton to get back to at least 70% of what he was pre-injury because they need that guy.  Holiday has done a bit more this year, and I do like the addition of Crowder, but Crowder is a 4th or 5th option on offense type part-time player, not a full-time 2nd or 3rd.  He can't make up the difference that not having Middleton is.  Even without Middleton at at least 70%, Milwaukee could still win the title because Giannis is just that good, but if they don't win, it will likely be for that reason.

The guy who puts up better numbers, plays (much) better defense and has a much bigger impact on winning isn't the better player?

So to be clear the guy that scores and rebounds less puts up much better numbers?  That seems like a strange argument to make.  Middleton was an all star, Holiday was not.  They both had the same amount of All NBA votes. 

Holiday as the 3rd option was more efficient shooting than Middleton as the 2nd option was, I will give you that.  Holiday as a guard had 1.4 more apg as well.  Holiday is obviously a better defender, but I'm pretty sure if you asked around, you'd find that Middleton was considered better than Holiday.  I mean ESPN's list before the year had Middleton at 19 and Holiday at 22.  Even coming off of injury this year, ESPN still had Middleton at 31, which was behind Holiday who they had at 26 for this season.  Holiday has obviously been a much better player than Middleton this year, no dispute there, but last year Middleton was the better player (and that seemed pretty clear because Holiday was awful once Middleton went down to injury in that 2nd option role).

[Roy H.]

So to be clear the guy that scores and rebounds less puts up much better numbers?  That seems like a strange argument to make.

See, this is why people don't take you seriously, Mo.  As mentioned:

Middleton scored more points, on more shots and a higher usage.

Jrue scored nearly as many points, while leading in assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, FG%, 3PT%, eFG%, TS%, PER, OWS, DFS, WS/48, VORP, BPM, etc.  Jrue's Net Rating was significantly better, and Jrue had a giant lead in on-off (an elite 14.0 for Jrue -- better than Giannis -- and a decent +5.4 for Middleton).

Holiday:  18.3 points on 14.2 FGA, 23.5% Usage, 50.1% FG%, 41.1% 3PT%, .570 eFG%

Middleton:  20.1 points on 15.5 FGA, 26.7% Usage, 44.3% FG%, 37.7% 3PT%, .522 eFG%

So, 1.8 extra points on 1.3 extra FGA.  That doesn't equate to better numbers.

So, I guess that leaves you with rebounding.  I will concede, the 6'7" SF Middleton slightly outrebounded the 6'3" PG Holiday by about 0.9 rebounds per game.  For whatever it's worth, though, Jrue grabs almost 50% more offensive rebounds than Middleton.