KIDD FIRED - Hughes/Grgurich also fired - Vin Baker Hired

[randy84]

when we look back at lebron’s legacy, we just have to give credit to Paul Silas.

Underated post

If LeBron spent his youth hawking sunglasses to tourists instead of playing AAU ball, that is.

But LeBron had to overcome the interventionism of AAU ball. Giannis was allowed to develop in a non-interventionalist way on the playgrounds of Greece.

[randy84]

You could swap Kidd for literally any other head coach in the league and Giannis would've become just as good or better. Most coaches would have him better considering they wouldn't have him playing in a clown show of a defensive scheme and wouldn't create a mental block with his jumpshot telling him not to shoot for a year.

Giannis went from skinny kinda weak kid to freakiest athlete in the league, and refined his ball skills to the point where he could handle an offensive centerpiece role. Sweeney and Suki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd in Giannis' development.

I guarantee his three point shot would be better.

[old skool]

The Bucks still have players who have yet to demonstrate that they know how to win in the NBA. The bench is severely lacking. The roster is imbalanced, lacking centers who can deal with physical play at the rim, lacking three point shooters, and lacking a solid back up PF. The Bucks have more talent and experience than the Lakers, less than the Pelicans and much, much less than the Warriors. The Bucks' record reflects that lack of talent. I do not support Kidd, but I think it is off base to blame him alone for the Bucks' record when the players bear more of the responsibility.

Excellent points throughout your post, and an accurate assessment of the state of the Bucks.

seriously not good points. instead irrelevent except for making the case on why we aren't a finals contender yet.

the reason we are mediocre....the singular reason....is that we have piss poor defense despite a roster that is capable of far more. that is the singular reason our roster peaked 3 years ago in kidds first year and have regressed since.

I respect your views. What is your explanation of the deterioration of the Bucks defensive performance under Kidd?
Players could execute his scheme in year one, but could not do so in subsequent years. It seems to me that the roster predicated on length and the defensive scheme was an attempt to hit a home run - analogous in some respects to the Warriors approach to offense, by trying a non-conventional system to take advantage unique personnel capabilities. I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

[sdn40]

I wonder if there is a speech psychologist out there that would suggest that "whether it means trading me" actually means "please for the love of God trade me." I'm kidding of course....mostly

[randy84]

Excellent points throughout your post, and an accurate assessment of the state of the Bucks.

seriously not good points. instead irrelevent except for making the case on why we aren't a finals contender yet.

the reason we are mediocre....the singular reason....is that we have piss poor defense despite a roster that is capable of far more. that is the singular reason our roster peaked 3 years ago in kidds first year and have regressed since.

I respect your views. What is your explanation of the deterioration of the Bucks defensive performance under Kidd?
Players could execute his scheme in year one, but could not do so in subsequent years. It seems to me that the roster predicated on length and the defensive scheme was an attempt to hit a home run - analogous in some respects to the Warriors approach to offense, by trying a non-conventional system to take advantage unique personnel capabilities. I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

I've always compared Kidd's defensive system to the "wildcat" in the NFL. It worked when teams didn't practice against or prepare for it. The following year, once teams realized it was a staple of the Dolphins playbook and teams began to prepare for it, the scheme failed miserably and the Dolphins abandoned it.

[old skool]

You could swap Kidd for literally any other head coach in the league and Giannis would've become just as good or better. Most coaches would have him better considering they wouldn't have him playing in a clown show of a defensive scheme and wouldn't create a mental block with his jumpshot telling him not to shoot for a year.

Giannis went from skinny kinda weak kid to freakiest athlete in the league, and refined his ball skills to the point where he could handle an offensive centerpiece role. Sweeney and Suki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd in Giannis' development.

I guarantee his three point shot would be better.

I think the staff did a great job with Antetokounmpo's 3-point shot. He had a higher 3FGA% his rookie year, but his rookie year technique was never going to be a viable option in the NBA. He started shooting from his waist, with a long swooping motion that took too long to get off and would certainly have been easy to block against defenses focused on stopping him. The coaches changed his shooting mechanics and banned him from shooting the 3 until he started to make them at a reasonable rate. Then they allowed him to try them during games, even though his shot is still a work in progress. He is much better today than he was before Kidd arrived. He should be a competent three point shooter if he keeps working on it.

To date, I think he has been focused on the right things. I like the step back jumper and the baby hook in the paint. I am not sure how anyone can guarantee that Giannis would be better if he had different coaching over the last year. I can't think of many (any?) NBA players who have grown so much in five years.

[Buck Dweller]

Excellent points throughout your post, and an accurate assessment of the state of the Bucks.

seriously not good points. instead irrelevent except for making the case on why we aren't a finals contender yet.

the reason we are mediocre....the singular reason....is that we have piss poor defense despite a roster that is capable of far more. that is the singular reason our roster peaked 3 years ago in kidds first year and have regressed since.

I respect your views. What is your explanation of the deterioration of the Bucks defensive performance under Kidd?
Players could execute his scheme in year one, but could not do so in subsequent years. It seems to me that the roster predicated on length and the defensive scheme was an attempt to hit a home run - analogous in some respects to the Warriors approach to offense, by trying a non-conventional system to take advantage unique personnel capabilities. I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

Kidd's defense worked for a grand total of half a season. That's 1/7 of his time here.

[paulpressey25]

Second question first: I think he had input. I would also agree with your implicit assumption that as a talent evaluator he left a lot to be desired. But it's probably disingenuous to pin all the bad personnel decisions this organization has made in the last four years to him.

Top 25%? I don't know what criteria to apply to make such a ranking. .

Sid--as far as personnel matters, agreed he's not 100% responsible or all the derp on the roster and blown picks. Hammond got in there as well. That said, most in the Bucks front office would tell you Kidd had an outsized influence. An influence that you couldn't separate him from completely. The personnel bad came along with the package.

I give him credit for giving the Bucks some cred and making Giannis into a man. All big things. But his time has past. No need for a high school chemistry teacher anymore. The pupil is working at DuPont and needs more advanced mentors now.

[Treebeard]

I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

I think it's reasonable that both conditions apply, especially the former. With the Bucks largely running a one-trick defense for the last few years, it gets figured out, especially by teams with patience and good shooters. But those skilled teams are the ones that the Bucks need to overcome if they expect to advance. Maybe this group of Bucks lacks the discipline to continually be in the right spots ball swing after ball swing within a possession. If that's the case, shouldn't other adjustments be made?

[randy84]

You could swap Kidd for literally any other head coach in the league and Giannis would've become just as good or better. Most coaches would have him better considering they wouldn't have him playing in a clown show of a defensive scheme and wouldn't create a mental block with his jumpshot telling him not to shoot for a year.

Giannis went from skinny kinda weak kid to freakiest athlete in the league, and refined his ball skills to the point where he could handle an offensive centerpiece role. Sweeney and Suki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd in Giannis' development.

I guarantee his three point shot would be better.

I think the staff did a great job with Antetokounmpo's 3-point shot. He had a higher 3FGA% his rookie year, but his rookie year technique was never going to be a viable option in the NBA. He started shooting from his waist, with a long swooping motion that took too long to get off and would certainly have been easy to block against defenses focused on stopping him. The coaches changed his shooting mechanics and banned him from shooting the 3 until he started to make them at a reasonable rate. Then they allowed him to try them during games, even though his shot is still a work in progress. He is much better today than he was before Kidd arrived. He should be a competent three point shooter if he keeps working on it.

To date, I think he has been focused on the right things. I like the step back jumper and the baby hook in the paint. I am not sure how anyone can guarantee that Giannis would be better if he had different coaching over the last year. I can't think of many (any?) NBA players who have grown so much in five years.

Well if you believe the more you do something the better you get at it, then it doesn't make sense to tell someone to stop shooting threes.

[randy84]

Brad Stevens needs to coach more like Kidd if he really wants his players to be successful. IMO.

Read on Twitter

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Excellent points throughout your post, and an accurate assessment of the state of the Bucks.

seriously not good points. instead irrelevent except for making the case on why we aren't a finals contender yet.

the reason we are mediocre....the singular reason....is that we have piss poor defense despite a roster that is capable of far more. that is the singular reason our roster peaked 3 years ago in kidds first year and have regressed since.

I respect your views. What is your explanation of the deterioration of the Bucks defensive performance under Kidd?
Players could execute his scheme in year one, but could not do so in subsequent years. It seems to me that the roster predicated on length and the defensive scheme was an attempt to hit a home run - analogous in some respects to the Warriors approach to offense, by trying a non-conventional system to take advantage unique personnel capabilities. I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

the league solved it as they always were going to after theyd faced it 3-4 times. when you know the double is coming and you watch video and understand the philosophy its not that hard to break. nba teams can break a press. they can break a trap. if its a unique trapping or pressing style it might take some adjustment for the players going against it but once you've seen it 4-5 times and watched some video there wasn't anything difficult about breaking it.

defenses like that are what you do when youre down and the opponent is unprepared.... you do it then because its risky. the only other time is maybe if your so far athletically advanced over the opponent that you can overwhelm them. yes were long but in the nba were not "that long" comparatively.

but if you wreak havoc for a minute with an approach like that you can get momentum going your way..... the reason all teams on all levels don't put that kind of pressure on the ball at all times is that its also a really good way to get your ass blown out quick giving up back door layups and weak side open jumpers.

so we saw that... it got solved.... and our coach stuck with it despite that. our gimmick defense didn't work anymore and our players were being called out for it. called out privately and called out publically. this was very similar to the skiles situation when he refused to abort a failing system and blamed the players as well. there was NO WAY this was going to work out. he was too damn hardheaded and quite frankly not competent enough to install plan b.

[old skool]

seriously not good points. instead irrelevent except for making the case on why we aren't a finals contender yet.

the reason we are mediocre....the singular reason....is that we have piss poor defense despite a roster that is capable of far more. that is the singular reason our roster peaked 3 years ago in kidds first year and have regressed since.

I respect your views. What is your explanation of the deterioration of the Bucks defensive performance under Kidd?
Players could execute his scheme in year one, but could not do so in subsequent years. It seems to me that the roster predicated on length and the defensive scheme was an attempt to hit a home run - analogous in some respects to the Warriors approach to offense, by trying a non-conventional system to take advantage unique personnel capabilities. I could not determine if the defensive deterioration was due to other teams figuring out how to beat the scheme or due to less experienced (young) players not executing it properly.

I've always compared Kidd's defensive system to the "wildcat" in the NFL. It worked when teams didn't practice against or prepare for it. The following year, once teams realized it was a staple of the Dolphins playbook and teams began to prepare for it, the scheme failed miserably and the Dolphins abandoned it.

I am not sure that is what happened with the Bucks. Too often I would see two or three players converge on the ball handler, leaving others wide open (Maker and Liggins in particular). I did not see that kind of breakdown in Kidd's first season with more veteran players on the court. I realize that it doesn't always work to cite a small sample of breakdowns, but I wonder what percent of the breakdowns were due to a lack of execution. Contrary to the general opinion here that the Bucks coaches are inept dummies, I would expect that the coaching staff would have been able to distinguish if execution failures were the problem, or if teams had identified a way to beat the Bucks' defensive scheme. I also expect that if players were executing the defense reasonably effectively and were still getting beat, the players would have pointed that out to the coaches, even if the staff disagreed. That is even before discussing the idea that any defensive scheme in the NBA will work without a physical defensive center. The only reason for Maker to ever be on the court is to develop him for the future. No coach is safe when Maker gets meaningful minutes at center at this point of his career.

[old skool]

Well if you believe the more you do something the better you get at it, then it doesn't make sense to tell someone to stop shooting threes.

No, but it does make sense to have them stop shooting with a very poor technique, work with them to develop a better technique, and then encourage the player to start incorporate that new shot into their game. I don't think they were finished, but I think progress was being made on that and many other levels.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

competent unselfish well spaced offense can always utterly destroy overzealous pressing trapping defense.

seriously.... you can annihilate it if you know what you are doing. length or athletic ability is irrelevant to that as it relates to the nba. theyre all long. theyre all athletic. they are all extremely competent if prepared. that's why games go into the 100s in the nba. the defense is always playing catch up. playing a defense that plays catch up by design over the course of seasons was bizarre.

[randy84]

I am not sure that is what happened with the Bucks. Too often I would see two or three players converge on the ball handler, leaving others wide open (Maker and Liggins in particular). I did not see that kind of breakdown in Kidd's first season with more veteran players on the court. I realize that it doesn't always work to cite a small sample of breakdowns, but I wonder what percent of the breakdowns were due to a lack of execution. Contrary to the general opinion here that the Bucks coaches are inept dummies, I would expect that the coaching staff would have been able to distinguish if execution failures were the problem, or if teams had identified a way to beat the Bucks' defensive scheme. I also expect that if players were executing the defense reasonably effectively and were still getting beat, the players would have pointed that out to the coaches, even if the staff disagreed. That is even before discussing the idea that any defensive scheme in the NBA will work without a physical defensive center. The only reason for Maker to ever be on the court is to develop him for the future. No coach is safe when Maker gets meaningful minutes at center at this point of his career.

I agree on Maker, but disagree that other teams didn't figure out how to beat his scheme.

[Nowak008]

You could swap Kidd for literally any other head coach in the league and Giannis would've become just as good or better. Most coaches would have him better considering they wouldn't have him playing in a clown show of a defensive scheme and wouldn't create a mental block with his jumpshot telling him not to shoot for a year.

Giannis went from skinny kinda weak kid to freakiest athlete in the league, and refined his ball skills to the point where he could handle an offensive centerpiece role. Sweeney and Suki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd in Giannis' development.

Just as good or better? Giannis is a top 5 player in the entire league. Kidd did Giannis a great service molding him into Shaq and not Tracy McGrady. If we had Scott Skiles or Terry Stotts I don't think Giannis is as good as he is now.

Hard to dispute a counterfactual I know, but it's what I believe. I'm not saying he shouldn't have been fired - he clearly earned it (Lakers pick/Jabari relationship/our current record) ... I just don't understand why so many ppl on here are going out of their way to not give Kidd any credit for Giannis's development.

[paulpressey25]

I did not see that kind of breakdown in Kidd's first season with more veteran players on the court.

The only reason for Maker to ever be on the court is to develop him for the future. No coach is safe when Maker gets meaningful minutes at center at this point of his career.

Kidd had ZaZa, Ersan and Dudley in year one along with a quick/strong albeit erratic PG in Brandon Knight. The first three were excellent positional defenders. They've never been replaced until Bledsoe replaced Knights speed/strength ratio at PG.

Much of Kidd's coaching failures come back to Kidd's personnel failures.

[old skool]

Several Bucks made great progress under Kidd.

Antetokounmpo is the gold star example. His development was an all-time accomplishment.

Maker made great progress. He is a much better player than he was one year ago, even though he has shown less than he did in the playoffs last year.

Middleton has developed into a near All-Star. He has improved his scoring almost every year, especially under Kidd. In the last two years his play making has improved notably, as evidenced by an increase in assists per game/36 minutes.

Brogdon has made great progress in a season and a half. He was extremely limited at the start of last season. Now he is a solid roatation player who makes big contributions at crunch time.

Parker was a much better player under Kidd than he was when he came into the league - even though missing much time to injury.

Some organic improvement should be expected regardless of coaching, but Bucks players seem to develop better than most under Kidd. Let's not fail to give him his due for those accomplishments just because of our warranted dislike of his limitations during games and with X's and O's.

[Pachinko_]

I think the staff did a great job with Antetokounmpo's 3-point shot. He had a higher 3FGA% his rookie year, but his rookie year technique was never going to be a viable option in the NBA. He started shooting from his waist, with a long swooping motion that took too long to get off and would certainly have been easy to block against defenses focused on stopping him. The coaches changed his shooting mechanics and banned him from shooting the 3 until he started to make them at a reasonable rate. Then they allowed him to try them during games, even though his shot is still a work in progress. He is much better today than he was before Kidd arrived. He should be a competent three point shooter if he keeps working on it.

So you have a guy who is so long he can literally dunk on his tiptoes, and they had to change his shot mechanics because someone was going to block him. At the 3 pt line. And easily as well.

Ok, thanks.