The Milwaukee Bucks thought they had found their championship formula when they traded for Damian Lillard. Three straight first-round exits later, with Lillard now waived and recovering from a torn Achilles, the franchise faces hard questions about leadership and accountability.
But according to one former NBA veteran, the biggest question might be about what Giannis Antetokounmpo didn’t say, not what he did.
Why Did the Bucks’ Championship Window Close So Quickly?
After losing in the first round of the 2023 postseason, the Milwaukee Bucks hoped to once again become a true championship contender centered around two-time MVP Giannis Antetokounmpo when they acquired star guard Damian Lillard from the Portland Trail Blazers in a deal involving Jrue Holiday.
Things have not gone as planned.
The Bucks were defeated in the first round of the 2024 and 2025 postseason, making it three straight first-round exits. To make matters worse, Holiday helped lead the Boston Celtics to a championship in 2024, turning what looked like a savvy move into a painful reminder of what Milwaukee gave up.
The string of issues all culminated in the 2025 postseason when the Bucks were not only taken out by the Indiana Pacers for the second straight year, but lost Lillard to a torn Achilles. The injury effectively ended any hope of salvaging the partnership that was supposed to deliver a title.
The Bucks looked somewhat stuck as the offseason began, leading to speculation they may trade Antetokounmpo. Instead, the Bucks were able to waive Lillard using the stretch provision and shockingly signed big man Myles Turner away from the rival Pacers.
What Role Did Giannis Antetokounmpo Play in the Bucks’ Roster Decisions?
With reports that Lillard was “surprised” by the move, Antetokounmpo’s role in those decisions has been downplayed. However, according to one ex-NBA guard, that doesn’t matter.
Former NBA guard Jim Jackson, appearing on Podcast P with current Philadelphia 76ers forward Paul George, explained why he believes Antetokounmpo not committing one way or the other is just as bad as if he did ask management to make a specific move.
“Here’s the thing about when you’re a Giannis, a LeBron in that situation that kind of controls the franchise — a Steph,” Jackson said.
“A non-answer is as bad as an answer. So if the coach is like — if management comes to you and says, ‘What do you think about coach?’ or ‘We’re going to do this’ or ‘We may fire him’ — and your star player is like, ‘Well, you know, you got to do what you got to do as an organization.’ So he’s not saying — he’s not saying no, that you got to fire him, that you don’t have to fire him, but he’s not saying yes, I advocate for [him].”
Jackson brings considerable credibility to his analysis. The former guard was the fourth-overall pick of the Dallas Mavericks in the 1992 NBA Draft and also spent time with the Brooklyn (then New Jersey) Nets, Philadelphia 76ers, Golden State Warriors, Portland Trail Blazers, Atlanta Hawks, Cleveland Cavaliers, Miami Heat, Sacramento Kings, Houston Rockets, Phoenix Suns and Los Angeles Lakers.
His extensive experience across multiple franchises gives him unique insight into how star players interact with front offices.
“So a lot of times — and I’m going to get to your point about loyalty — a lot of times it’s like a player being in a situation: ‘Look, I didn’t know, I didn’t say anything, I didn’t — you know, I’m upset,’ but did you really advocate to have this person stay, or did you just kind of let the organization, when they asked you the question, do what they had to do? And you can’t play that in-between,” Jackson explained.
Jackson’s perspective highlights the complex dynamics between superstars and management. When franchises invest everything in a player of Antetokounmpo’s caliber, silence can speak as loudly as any direct request. The former guard suggests that neutrality from a franchise cornerstone essentially becomes complicity in organizational decisions.
Can Antetokounmpo Rebuild His Leadership Reputation?
It’s an interesting question that Jackson poses. Antetokounmpo is one of the most popular players in the league, and his ability to have fun, often with fans online, has made him a very likable player. His public persona remains largely untarnished despite the team’s struggles.
Whether or not Antetokounmpo can truly be blamed (or credited if you want to put it that way) for these moves is still up for debate. The two-time MVP has consistently maintained that he trusts the organization to make the right decisions, but Jackson’s analysis suggests that approach might be part of the problem.
However, if the Bucks can once again become a legitimate contender, none of that will matter. Turner’s addition represents a significant shift in strategy, moving away from the guard-heavy approach that defined the Lillard era toward a more traditional big man presence in the paint.
For now, Milwaukee enters the 2025-26 season with more questions than answers about their championship prospects and their superstar’s role in shaping the roster that will determine their fate.
