Scott Skiles: Yay or Nay?

[Balls2TheWalls]

Epi, while I understand that you want an "all else equal" comparison so that you can easily assess the differences between LK and Skiles, and to some extent I want the same thing.

However, I think that the roster that Skiles is going to get left with is a coach killing roster. I think that we could have brought in Pop or Sloan and they wouldn't have much success with our roster.

I see either Redd or Mo and CV being gone before the season starts.

[fam3381]

I still don't see why to make that case the offense for a LONG TIME not even being mediocre was said. But like you say, it is but an internet forum, so who cares about facts.

He wrote, "It's been a long time where our offense has been either great, or mediocre, to go along with a defense that is always poor." So I think you misread the post, Epi.

The Bucks since 00/01 have been 1st, 8th, 2nd, 4th, 12th, 13th, 11th, and 22nd in offensive efficiency.

[Sigra]

-= original quote snipped =-

Yeah but do they want to be here. Here's my theory:
The Bucks know the locker room is cancerous and are keeping Bogut and Yi while shipping out Mo and Redd. The plan is to rebuild which means some more short term pain. Do Carlisle or Brown want their winning %'s taking a hit while our young guys develop? I doubt it and from what I can gather Skiles likes coaching younger guys because they are not set in their ways.

My guess is Skiles is the only veteran coach available that is willing to put up with a rebuild.

+1

[Epicurus]

-= original quote snipped =-



He wrote, "It's been a long time where our offense has been either great, or mediocre, to go along with a defense that is always poor." So I think you misread the post, Epi.

The Bucks since 00/01 have been 1st, 8th, 2nd, 4th, 12th, 13th, 11th, and 22nd in offensive efficiency.

How did I misread? But I do see how because of sentence construction how it could be read--1) long time since great or mediocre offense+ a defense always poor or 2) we've had a great or mediocre offense for a long time + a poor defense. From his subsequent words, I see he meant the second, but that can not be told from sentence construction ( I am not criticizing his grammar, just the difficulty of English, especially punctuation).

[Epicurus]

Epi, while I understand that you want an "all else equal" comparison so that you can easily assess the differences between LK and Skiles, and to some extent I want the same thing.

Actually to see the differences between more academic propositions. And yes, unfortunately things are rarely ceteris paribus. I agree the team will probably be broken up. Skiles is probably the only established coach willng to live through the demolition project. He is strange enough to even welcome it.

[WEFFPIM]

Actually to see the differences between more academic propositions. And yes, unfortunately things are rarely ceteris paribus. I agree the team will probably be broken up. Skiles is probably the only established coach willng to live through the demolition project. He is strange enough to even welcome it.

This is a good point that you and AussieBuck (earlier, can't find it) bring up. Skiles has done the rebuilding process twice before and succeeded twice before. Carlisle hasn't, Brown went through bad seasons, but they were not with the intention of rebuilding. He also probably didn't like the way his situation with the Bulls ended (he left positively, I just mean the state of the team on the floor) and wants to make up for a lack of results.

[REDDzone]

One third of this board doesn't like this hire, I don't get it.

Last year I said I was a bit skeptical of the LK signing, and I was told I was the "problem with the world today" because I didn't give anyone a chance.

This year we have a guy who has an established track record of turning bad teams to good ones and has a career record of 30 games over 500 (not a small sample size). And one third of this board doesn't like it.

You guys are the worse.

[Epicurus]

One third of this board doesn't like this hire, I don't get it.

Last year I said I was a bit skeptical of the LK signing, and I was told I was the "problem with the world today" because I didn't give anyone a chance.

This year we have a guy who has an established track record of turning bad teams to good ones and has a career record of 30 games over 500 (not a small sample size). And one third of this board doesn't like it.

You guys are the worse.

Was the Phoenix team Skiles inherited a bad team? They were 13-7 when Skiles took over; 27-23 the shortened season before; and 56-26 the year before. Seems like he lucked out nicely and was able to build a nice winning percentage on that foundation. But yes, the Bulls thing was a turnaround of a bad team, but that wasn't until the second year.

[REDDzone]

-= original quote snipped =-



Was the Phoenix team Skiles inherited a bad team? They were 13-7 when Skiles took over; 27-23 the shortened season before; and 56-26 the year before. Seems like he lucked out nicely and was able to build a nice winning percentage on that foundation. But yes, the Bulls thing was a turnaround of a bad team, but that wasn't until the second year.

Oops, I thought I read somewhere the Suns team before Skiles was horrible. Probably should have checked that out.

Actually, come to think of it, I probably saw the 27 win season and thought that was a full one. Oops.

[Nowak008]

I voted yay, hard for me not to after the coaching genius that is LK.

+1

Still took about 2 hours of convincing from GAD to persuade me. I look at his track record in developing young players and it makes me worried. He also doesn't have any experience developing a big man like Bogut. Also the fact he has alienated a dozen players and with the drama we had this year I could do with out all that.

[bigballajohn]

i wanted carlisle, but i think the bucks could do good.

[Licensed to Il]

Yes!

I was the first person on here to state that I thought Skiles was the best fit, and my first choice as next coach (not that anyone cares).

He might very well only get us from "point A" to "point B". But seeing that we haven't been to "point C" since Lew Alcinder played for us, I'm totally fine with getting past "point A".

Skiles' teams will play hard and defend, and every player is held accountable. I can't figure out why so many people don't like the way Skiles calls a dog a dog. He is not mean spirited, he doesn't take pleasure in badmouthing guys. But if someone is not getting the job done, and he is asked about it, he doesn't lie. That is refreshing to me. Plus... some of his all time biggest whipping boys (like Eddy C) had their absolute best seasons under his coaching and have done little elsewhere under more "enabling" coaches.

[Chapter29]

I like the move, but as I feared we got the left overs of the top coaches that were available. Left overs and the others are still available, go figure. We must have known that the others were not interested.

I think this is a major upgrade over LK, Stotts and Porter, but nothing to get overly excited about.

[Chapter29]

From what I have read, Skiles seems to be the most in demand.

I hear you. I have been reading the same information, but I guess I just don't see it. Granted an expert I am not.

[xTitan]

I like the move, but as I feared we got the left overs of the top coaches that were available. Left overs and the others are still available, go figure. We must have known that the others were not interested.

I think this is a major upgrade over LK, Stotts and Porter, but nothing to get overly excited about.

From what I have read, Skiles seems to be the most in demand.

[Epicurus]

I like the move, but as I feared we got the left overs of the top coaches that were available. Left overs and the others are still available, go figure. We must have known that the others were not interested.

I think this is a major upgrade over LK, Stotts and Porter, but nothing to get overly excited about.

Maybe before saying that we need to see how well his team does when he must give over 30% of court time to guys without an NBA team the following year. Or after a team was changed for financial reasons as Porter suffered. On the other hand, it should be an upgrade since he brings more years experience as head coach and on the whole, for various reasons, were successful. Major? Maybe, let me put you down therefore for at least 50 wins this season.

[showtimesam]

I'm amazed any fan isn't excited.

I am very optimistic about the Bucks future and I love the fact we have a tough as nails coach that will demand that the game be played the right way.

We got a big time coach today.

[Thunder Muscle]

I'm going Nay.

I can't rationalize the move like I do most other moves the team makes. Maybe I will in a day or two. I'd only be happy if Skiles were the only guy we could get (which may be the case).

Would have rather spent the extra 10 million on Carlisle assuming he would have then accepted if more money was offered. We will spend that extra money anyways on Skiles buyout in 2010-11.

Reading the NY Post thread you get the impression Skiles wanted NY first but Walsh didn't want him.

No question Skiles is hard medicine and he and Hammond will do things the right way. I just had hoped that the guy with a better track record and more polish (Carlisle) would have come here. So I'm not down on the move. Just a Nay in comparison to what I thought we were getting.

PP, you were almost on the spot. Just a year off and the Bucks didn't offer enough (allegdely).

[yuedar]

I remember this poll... glad to say I voted no back then and still vote no now!