MJS:Hammond "thinks he'll be back"/Skiles future uncertain

[Epicurus]

Unless an upgrade is available, then why change coaches? Will the roster as a whole or on average improve under someone else? By improvement I mean by verifiable measures and not some congruence with a fans' frame of good coaching and playing.

As far as the second question above, existing research indicates that only with a few exceptions does the head coach matter as far as player performance. And I think the couple of exceptions I recall are retired now. So yes, if Phil Jackson is willing to come to the Bucks, then fire Skiles. Otherwise, the probability of it mattering is not very great, with more of a liklihood of regresssion if an uprepared coach is chosen.

[europa]

Unless an upgrade is available, then why change coaches? Will the roster as a whole or on average improve under someone else? By improvement I mean by verifiable measures and not some congruence with a fans' frame of good coaching and playing.

There's no way to know if the team will improve under a new head coach unless that option is attempted. Perhaps it fails but it's a no-lose proposition for the Bucks. There is a possibility the team improves so that would make for a compelling reason to make the switch. The other possibility is they become even worse. Well they already stink and considering how the NBA system is set up (a system Kohl approved with the new CBA by the way), stinking worse is actually one of the means by which teams can improve their long-term fortunes. So even if the Bucks fire Skiles and hire a head coach who makes the team worse it could ultimately make the team better in the long run. So ultimately, there is no downside at all to firing Skiles if the true goal is meaningful improvement not just in the short-term but long-term as well.

Yes this is a pretty good reason why the NBA is completely messed up. But Kohl and his fellow owners had a chance to change the system and they chose not to.

Of course, all this doesn't take into account the possibility Skiles wants out. He certainly had the look of a head coach who wanted no part of the Bucks for most of this season. His actions, words and coaching moves provide plenty of evidence to support that belief.

[ampd]

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the logic that goes something like "now we got rid of Bogut so we have enough money to extend Carlos Delfino". Why we would even be offering him a contract after this season is beyond me unless its just a 1 year stop gap thing so they can be way under the cap after next season.

[blkout]

Skiles refuses to play young players any significant minutes regardless of their productivity, gives the worst defensive player possibly in the entire league starter minutes and the one season he doesn't dick around with Ersan's minutes/role he has by far the best year of his career and earns himself a large extension. I won't miss him. His calling card was in being a great defensive coach and that's well and truly gone down the toilet, why keep him?

[JayMKE]

Anyone that will play rookies is an upgrade over Skiles.

The man has clearly gone insane, that is the only explanation as to why Drew frickin Gooden plays as much as he does

[midranger]

Skiles refuses to play young players any significant minutes regardless of their productivity

This is simply not true.

[raferfenix]

If we are planning for next year to be a development year, yes please get rid of Skiles.

But if we're keeping Hammond, not blowing up the roster, and planning to win now like usual, then it'll assuredly go much more poorly without him.

Sure, we might luck our way into a tank season like when we had Krystkowiak admitting his coaching faults in post-game interviews.

Let's just not do that alongside bankrolling Ersan / Delfino and picking up another soon-to-be-massively overpaid guy like Kaman.

[REDDzone]

I still think the best route is to fire Michael Scott Hammonds and let the new gm pick the new coach, whether that be Skiles or not.

[blkout]

Skiles refuses to play young players any significant minutes regardless of their productivity

This is simply not true.

Prove it, don't waste my time with one line comments. Four players on the team under 24, one of them played more than 15mpg.

The ones he didn't bother playing:

Harris: 16/8 per36 .540TS%
Leuer: 14/8 per 36 .536TS%
Sanders: 10/9/4 blocks per 36 .463TS%

[Kerb Hohl]

It was always odd that we got our **** knocked in when the young studs played.

[blkout]

This is the worst part (according to 82games.com)

Leuer - Team was better offensively and defensively with him on the court
Harris - Team was better offensively and defensively with him on the court
Sanders - Team was 1 point worse offensively but 10 points better defensively with him on the court

There is literally nothing more they could have done in the minutes received to prove they deserve more time. They were backing up guys like Drew Gooden and Carlos Delfino too its not as if they were battling Durant and Harden for minutes there is no explanation for it.

[paulpressey25]

It was always odd that we got our **** knocked in when the young studs played.

Remember when we drafted Potsie with the lotto pick and Moute with the 2nd rounder?

Joe played 12 minutes a game his rookie year, with most of those coming the last month after we had been eliminated from the playoffs.

Moute played 25.8 minutes per game his rookie year. Including logging some 40 minute + games in his first month in the league.

Brandon Jennings started all 82 games his rookie year.

If you have a skill-set that demands playing time, you get on the court under Skiles. He's not the type of guy who is going to play people "developmental" minutes.

[blkout]

So being better than the guys you're backing up is not a skill set that demands playing time? The quote was REGARDLESS OF PRODUCTION. This isn't about development at all or playing rookies for the sake of playing them. If they deserve to play they should play, there's nothing more those guys could do to show they deserved more minutes and the people in front of them certainly weren't doing anything to keep them out.

[midranger]

Skiles refuses to play young players any significant minutes regardless of their productivity

This is simply not true.

Prove it, don't waste my time with one line comments. Four players on the team under 24, one of them played more than 15mpg.

The ones he didn't bother playing:

Harris: 16/8 per36 .540TS%
Leuer: 14/8 per 36 .536TS%
Sanders: 10/9/4 blocks per 36 .463TS%

See: Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, Andres Nocioni, Chris Duhon (4 rookies the same year, all played big minutes on a good team), kirk Hinrich, LRMAM, Shawn Marion, Brandon Jennings.

There is one guy in his career that he played less that 1000 minutes as a rookie, who became anything. That was Joe Johnson, who he played 950+.

Sorry you are very wrong.

[blkout]

See: Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, Andres Nocioni, Chris Duhon (4 rookies the same year, all played big minutes on a good team), kirk Hinrich, LRMAM, Shawn Marion, Brandon Jennings.

There is one guy in his career that he played less that 1000 minutes as a rookie, who became anything. That was Joe Johnson, who he played 950+.

Sorry you are very wrong.

You're talking about a career, I'm talking about this season. He's had teams where he's had 7-8 guys under 24 on teams at the same time what choice would he have?