What happened to the Bucks’ once-prolific three-guard lineup? Part 1

In the Bucks’ third preseason game, not only did Giannis make his preseason debut, but so did the starting lineup of Kevin Porter Jr., AJ Green, Gary Trent Jr., and Myles Turner around the two-time MVP. Playing these three guards together is curious, and a bit unconventional: Trent and Green have (or at least had, last year) overlapping skillsets, and neither was big enough to be a true three. But a similar small-ball “death lineup” with the three guards was so effective late last year that it became the talk of the offseason: Marques Johnson called the guard trio “the triumverate” in his appearance on our podcast Deer Diaries, as well as on his own, Hear District.

After Damian Lillard went down with deep vein thrombosis late in the year and missed the last fourteen games, the lineup of Porter, Green, Trent, Giannis, and Bobby Portis in Brook Lopez’s stead became an increasingly key part of victories, particularly during their season-ending eight-game win streak. It never started a game, but was the closing lineup for several important wins, notably against Minnesota and Detroit. We didn’t actually see that much of those five—after all, Porter didn’t join the team until February—but by the numbers, it was perhaps their most successful group, according to two sources:

• NBA.com Lineups Tool: 42 minutes, 144.6 offensive rating, 93.4 defensive rating, +51.2 net rating
• Cleaning The Glass: 88 possessions, 151.1 offensive rating, 96.6 defensive rating, +54.6 net rating

NBA.com ranked KPJ/Green/Trent/Giannis/Portis eighth in the entire league among lineups that played at least 30 minutes. CTG ranks it 100th percentile in net rating and offensive rating, and 95th in defensive rating. Compare these numbers with every lineup that played more minutes than them:

If Doc had given them more run, they’d still probably be elite, even with some regression. Among groups with at least 100 possessions, the league’s best was the Clippers’ James Harden, Kris Dunn, Norm Powell, Amir Coffey (lol), and Ivica Zubac at +47.7 in 121 possessions. Hell, with the minimum set to 88 possessions, the Portis group was still tops—the only higher net belonged to one also broken up last offseason: Fred VanVleet, Amen Thompson, Dillon Brooks, Tari Eason, and Alperen Sengun in Houston. No other lineup came very close to these Bucks and Rockets “death lineups,” unless you lowered the threshold even further to find ones like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Isaiah Joe, Lu Dort, Aaron Wiggins, and Jalen Williams in OKC at +63.0 in 73 possessions.

Of course, Lopez left this offseason, and Turner assumed his mantle. The logic went that slotting Turner alongside Giannis and the guards, rather than Portis or Lopez, would work. Ergo, if you ask most Bucks fans online last offseason which five players they wanted Doc Rivers to play from the jump this year, their answer was Porter/Green/Trent/Giannis/Turner. That’s indeed what they got, as we saw in the season opener against Washington. But we haven’t seen it at a tipoff since, thanks in part to KPJ’s and Giannis’ injuries, plus Ryan Rollins’ emergence. In fact, since Porter sprained his ankle on opening night, that fivesome has played just 10 more minutes in only two games.

It’s been exceptional in the little time we’ve seen it: Cleaning The Glass, which filters out heaves and garbage time, has their net rating at +43.2 in 37 possessions, with a 154.1 offensive rating (both rank in the 100th percentile leaguewide) and a 110.8 defensive rating (85th). NBA.com has them at +48.9 in 17 total minutes this year, with an offensive rating of 156.8 and a defensive rating of 107.9. When asked how Porter, Green, and Trent were gelling so far in the preseason, here was Doc from his comments on October 12th, when we first saw them start with Giannis and Turner:

“They like it… They gotta keep moving to ball… there’ll be nights where we can’t go with three guards. When we go with [Kyle Kuzma] or [Amir Coffey] or [Taurean Prince]. But for the most part, we think we can do it. Our guards got a lot of toughness about them, so we think we can do it.”

Well, it turns out there were a lot of those nights, but Doc isn’t necessarily wrong. In all lineups where the three guards have played together, CTG gives them a +3.8 net in 129 possessions, though that’s based on defense: their defensive rating is 105.5, in the 97th percentile. Perhaps because of Trent’s decline, their offensive rating is a putrid, way down in 11th. That’s still a good lineup, but of course, these stats are buoyed by the opening-night starting five that includes Giannis. Remove that lineup from the equation, and you have eight with even stinkier offense—a 91.3 offensive rating (oth)—and elite defense—a 103.3 defensive rating (99th). That results in a -12.0 net over 92 possessions (8th). None of those eight other lineups include Giannis, meaning he’s barely played alongside these three guards this year.

Milwaukee has used last year’s +54.6 net “death lineup” (featuring Portis only once this year), not even for a full minute. That’s not too surprising because of injuries to two of its key members, so what about its effectiveness with Turner? Given his similar scoring ability and vastly superior defense to those of Portis, it’s easy to infer that swapping Turner in would work swimmingly. Similar formula: three guards with three-and-D capability, a big who also has an outside shot, and two ballhandlers, one of whom is freaking Giannis Antetokounmpo.

Nevertheless, I’m probably not the only one who both wanted the KPJ/Green/Trent/Giannis/Turner quintet on opening night, but also wondered if the success with Portis—and by extension, starting three guards—was a mirage. So I decided to do a little exercise comparing lineups from one year to the next around the league and see how they fared. But I had some parameters to set, given how relatively little the Portis group actually played. Even though they use minutes instead of possessions and don’t filter out garbage time, here I used NBA.com’s stats because I could set my minimum to 30 minutes.

Given the amount of annual roster turnover in the NBA, it’s not easy to find lineups that succeeded significant action in their first year and kept it up with a similar or larger minute load the following season. Trickier yet was to find a killer group that went from much more limited exposure—like our Portis example—to a modestly featured group. Or from under 100 minutes to a starting lineup that played most of the season. It would be even more cumbersome to go back years and years using these parameters. For now, let’s stick to 2023–24 and 2024–25, so we have full-season data. How did groups translate their success in limited playing time to the next league year? Here’s what I found:

I threw in a weaker example from 2023–24—the +0.2 net Pacers group with Siakam—because of all the lineups I found that stayed together over both seasons, that one improved the most, from net-neutral to solidly above average. Granted, a few of these were only moderately successful in the first place, though it comes as little surprise that the best teams are generally keeping these groups together—it’s why those teams are good, after all. On the surface, the stats aren’t very encouraging; only five of the 18 lineups improved. And on average, their net dropped by 10.6 points per 100 possessions.

The good news is that 12 of these 18 lineups were at least productive (for reference, CTG says any lineup with a net of +10 or better was at least in the 64th percentile last year). And all these teams had at least one in 2023–24 that was really good, at +15.1 or better in at least 100 possessions, the top 20% of the league. Only three of those lineups improved in 2024–25, but the really elite groups—+31 or better, 95th percentile on up—stayed elite, except for the Boston example with Pritchard.

It’s worth pointing out that several more of the best 2023–24 lineups were broken up by player movement, most notably with Julius Randle and Isaiah Hartenstein leaving the Knicks, plus Josh Giddey leaving the Thunder. But much like the Bucks did with Turner, those teams replaced those guys with serious talent, so let’s see if any of the best 2023–24 lineups benefited from a personnel upgrade the following season. This will be a bit inexact (New York was especially tricky because of the Mikal Bridges acquisition), but I sought out successful 2023–24 lineups from teams that incorporated a high-profile offseason acquisition into similar 2024–25 lineups, or at least lineups that featured prominent returning players. I considered some other moves, like Paul George to Philadelphia, but there was too much turnover on these teams’ rosters between seasons to find similar-enough lineups. Anyway, onto the numbers, with offseason additions in bold (for the Knicks’ purposes, we’ll treat Quentin Grimes for Cam Payne as a wash):

Coincidentally, these examples are all teams that added a new big man. These lineups’ net dropped by an average of 7.5 points per 100—better, but still not good. Again, most of the new lineups were great overall, though: eight of the 14 were at least +15.0. And ones that were excellent in small sample sizes were generally still great with more playing time. As before, these are some of the league’s teams, adding to groupings that already proved effective.

You might think I’ve strayed from the premise of this article a bit, but there were plenty of three-guard lineups above in OKC and New York. In part two, we’ll figure out whether three guards is still a look Milwaukee should use, with or without Turner. Spoiler alert: Gary Trent Jr. is exactly not part of the answer. And we’ll see if these patterns still hold when other teams add a prominent big man to their lineups, much like the Bucks did this offseason.