Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25
kebzach wrote:DrugBust wrote:If you're looking for the definitive national media piece on this team, Zach Lowe at Grantland nails it.
Nails it and then some. The headline says it all. And props to Zach Lowe for calling Jennings as he really is.
DrugBust wrote:If you're looking for the definitive national media piece on this team, Zach Lowe at Grantland nails it.
Kohl Is A Mome wrote:I didn't get to talk to him much unfortunately since I had another resident to deal with when he stopped in, but the impression i got sounds like Henson is happy Skiles is gone.
europa wrote:Kohl Is A Mome wrote:I didn't get to talk to him much unfortunately since I had another resident to deal with when he stopped in, but the impression i got sounds like Henson is happy Skiles is gone.
Other than Jennings it doesn't sound like anyone was disappointed to see Skiles go. I thought Moute's comments were very interesting. Talked about respecting Skiles but made it clear the two had plenty of issues. And it's not like Moute's a problem guy by any stretch. He's also someone you would think fits right into Skiles' wheelhouse as a player so if he struggled to get along with Skiles I think it says a lot about Skiles as a head coach.
Larry Sanders on his reaction: "It's a change. Everyone tells me in my career, expect to have multiple coaches in situations like this. So I was kind of prepared for it. I wasn't sure how long he was going to be here this year -- I knew he was on the last leg of his contract. So everything was kind of up in the air. We'll see how the team responds tonight, if it gives us a boost or if there's other things we need to adjust. I think it's good, though. Change is good sometimes."
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute on reports Skiles wasn't getting along with some players: "He gave me an opportunity. We didn't have the greatest relationship, but we had a good relationship. I have respect for him and I'm sure he has respect for me. I've been here since he's been here, so we have mutual respect for each other. There was friction, but even in families you have friction. You still have to live with your brothers or whatever. I've seen it, but every team has that. Now you're talking about the Lakers, who are going through that stuff. Every time a team isn't playing well, stuff like that is going to come up."
Henson: "It's interesting. Being with Coach Williams (at North Carolina), you don't think he's going to leave. And if he does, it's going to be on his own terms. So it's interesting, but I guess that's the NBA. I was a little surprised, but that's change. He gave me a chance early on to play, and that's really all you can ask for as a young guy, so I wish nothing but the best for him and I'm sure at some point in my career we'll meet somewhere down the road again."
emunney wrote:europa wrote:Kohl Is A Mome wrote:I didn't get to talk to him much unfortunately since I had another resident to deal with when he stopped in, but the impression i got sounds like Henson is happy Skiles is gone.
Other than Jennings it doesn't sound like anyone was disappointed to see Skiles go. I thought Moute's comments were very interesting. Talked about respecting Skiles but made it clear the two had plenty of issues. And it's not like Moute's a problem guy by any stretch. He's also someone you would think fits right into Skiles' wheelhouse as a player so if he struggled to get along with Skiles I think it says a lot about Skiles as a head coach.
Definitely raised my eyebrows to see Moute's reaction. Skiles leaned on him from day 1. You'd think that if anybody would have supported him other than Jennings, it'd be him. Of course, Moute is also friends with Bogut.
DukeH wrote:Plenty, RealGM Bucks Board is the Golden Dawn of forums.
paulpressey25 wrote: When they get it going, they are as good as any backcourt in the league.
http://podcast.sportsradio1250.com/wssp2/3813432.mp3
paulpressey25 wrote:Gery is all in now. Feels even more confident the Bucks will make the ECF with Skiles gone.
Loves the backcourt. When they get it going, they are as good as any backcourt in the league.
http://podcast.sportsradio1250.com/wssp2/3813432.mp3
The Milwaukee Bucks organization and head coach Jim Boylan undoubtedly share the dream of contending for an NBA championship, but if that scenario ever comes to pass they won't share the experience. Let's call it what it is: Boylan is an interim coach. Sure, general manager John Hammond confidently declared that Skiles' lead assistant is not an interim coach and that he will coach the team for the balance of the 2012-13 NBA season, but isn't that the basic definition of an interim coach?
An assistant promoted in the wake of a messy breakup is almost always a temporary solution; a fleeting remnant of the previous regime that sticks with the organization to provide some baseline level of continuity while the front office prepares to clean up the situation at a later date. That's not necessarily a bad thing -- I think Boylan deserves his chance as long as the Bucks aren't ready to sign anyone to a long-term deal -- but the way things ended with Skiles it's pretty clear that the Bucks were looking for (a) the coach who already understood the limitations of the roster and (b) someone not named Scott Skiles.
I can confidently say that Jim Boylan is not named Scott Skiles, which satisfies one requirement, but after almost eight seasons as the lead assistant for Skiles it remains to be seen how different he will be in the actual practice of coaching the team.
I don't expect much to change for the players, but in a way this will be a test for the surly fans who consistently offered up criticisms of Skiles. Here's your chance to prove you meant what you said. To me, the hyper-criticisms of Skiles mostly express misdirected anger of discontented fans.
A better mix of top-end talent and more consistent performers would have solved many of the rotational issues noted by Bucks faithful, but it's hard to root for better players and easier to root against a coach. If Skiles has stubbornly stunted the development of a budding contender, I've never heard that stated directly. Most people generally accept that .500 talent gets you a .500 team, and nobody has been bold enough to argue (at least using a consistent logical approach) that Skiles had cost the Bucks games in the aggregrate. In any case, now is the time for every Skiles detractor to prove that they meant what they said.
Most people generally accept that .500 talent gets you a .500 team, and nobody has been bold enough to argue (at least using a consistent logical approach) that Skiles had cost the Bucks games in the aggregrate.
Code: Select all
o- - - \o __|
o/ /| vv`\
/| | |
| / \_ |
/ \ | |
/ | |
LUKE23 wrote:Great read:
http://www.brewhoop.com/2013/1/10/38575 ... iles-bucksbut the way things ended with Skiles it's pretty clear that the Bucks were looking for (a) the coach who already understood the limitations of the roster and (b) someone not named Scott Skiles.
Yup. Thats about right.I don't expect much to change for the players, but in a way this will be a test for the surly fans who consistently offered up criticisms of Skiles. Here's your chance to prove you meant what you said. To me, the hyper-criticisms of Skiles mostly express misdirected anger of discontented fans.
Is this guy serious? "Prove you meant what you said?" What does that even mean?
If Skiles has stubbornly stunted the development of a budding contender, I've never heard that stated directly.
I don't think I've seen anyone state that either. Not pro-Skiles Bucks fans. Not anti-Skiles Bucks fans. So whats this guy's point?In any case, now is the time for every Skiles detractor to prove that they meant what they said.
Really?