Should the Bucks hire Jason Kidd (as coach pg 43)?

[Sherman Douglas]

To people saying Kidd is justified in trying to make a power play because King sucks and asking "wouldn't you do the same if your boss was incompetent?" - That is really not how it works, at all. If my boss is incompetent, and I'm unqualified for my current job, that still doesn't give me the right or the leverage to try and take his job. I'm still not qualified, even if he's a clown. It's even worse when I've only been doing my current job for a freaking year, and didn't even do that great of a job.

Your perspective is Kidd is unqualified. Other perspective is Kidd is vastly more qualified than Billy King. There in lies the disconnect.

So because King is unqualified that means Kidd, also unqualified, should get his job? That's where your logic falls apart.

If King gets pushed out, what makes Kidd think he should be the one to get the job?

[MickeyDavis]

And good lord, as far as "compensation" goes...We should be taking their first round picks for taking this problem off their hands if it happens.

This

[Sherman Douglas]

Also, Billy King has way more qualifications as an exec than Kidd.

[randy84]

So Kidd becomes POBO and has the power to veto Hammond's trades and free agency signings. Is that such a bad thing?

[humanrefutation]

The only bright side to getting Kidd on board is that it might help grease the skids for an arena deal. Casual fans will eat this up.

No they won't. Kidd culturally doesn't play here. Prima Donna, DUI's, Domestic abuse won't jibe with casual fan going to Brewer games now that Bucks need to reach. That type of angle only works in places like NYC.

I just looked at my Facebook timeline and saw several people who NEVER talk about the Bucks posting about this. You underestimate the value of name recognition.

[KingWing]

I wouldnt equate the nets 2014 record with Kidd, he more was fortunate with Lopez going down. once that happend the nets could finally play a winning brand of ball. Lopez killed any chance of pierce/jj being effective on offense because he demanded touches and was a huge ball stopper. and the bigger problem was defensively, as it compounded the defensive issues pierce had by having such a poor defender in lopez who breaks you down with his inability to gaurd the pick and roll and inability to stop wings from getting to the rim as a help man.

once lopez was gone, we had a much better chance to win. now, pierce and JJ get mroe volume, they are better passers, the ball moves. you move KG to center and get another ball handler/passer/role guy in livingston on the floor. you get more defenders on the floor. it was an enormous burden lifted off the team.

thats the biggest downside to us losing kidd. he knew brook was not a player you win with and wanted him gone, which reportedly is the biggest reason for this whole riff.

Thanks for the info. Do you know if there were any other moves he lobbied for?

[tedbrogen]

What credentials did Danny Ainge have before becoming Director of Basketball Operations, anyone know?

He was friends with McHale and knew McHale owed him a solid?

[bizarro]

What credentials did Danny Ainge have before becoming Director of Basketball Operations, anyone know?

Ainge was coach of the Suns for 3 years (?). I remember the thing with his son (??) and he left early in the season in the mid 90's or so to be replaced by none other than: Scott Skiles. He then was hired in 2002 or 2003 to be the Executive Director of Basketball Ops in Boston. Obviously, Ainge has a much better human track record. But, I completely agree with your point.

Again, it's all about relationships people. Like it or not, there is a definitive comfort level Lasry and Edens have with Kidd - they've done business and have personal relationships. And, add to that: Kidd has a vision. Like it or not. This is what it is. And, as I said previously, I'm going to get on board until it bursts into flames.

[Profound23]

http://nesn.com/2014/06/report-ray-allen-plans-to-follow-lebron-james-wherever-he-lands-in-free-agency/

Ray Allen, another player who was ok with the city of Milwaukee.Just need Larcy to get the details worked out with Lebron. These guys are great.

I realize it's not happening. However, I would reach out to Lebron and Wade, begging them to at least sit down with us. The positive PR behind him just coming to visit Milwaukee would be huge for the fanbase and a new arena. Everyone would say, "well they were trying to get Lebron."

[randy84]

Also, Billy King has way more qualifications as an exec than Kidd.

Billy King was promoted to General Manager with only one year of experience. Hardly a sterling resume.

[Frank Nova]

If ur boss at work was a hack and u had the opportunity to tell the big boss that u think u can do a better job then why are u so wrong for doing so?

If I had been working there for a week and had been hired despite having no college degree and a checkered history, it would be wrong.

I get ur point but Billy Kings entire NBA accomplishment list is a joke on it's own. Kidds credentials as a player almost outweighs anything King has done. So while I agree with ur argument, it certainly doesn't apply here at all. I'd rather give a fresh start to an unknown and see what he's got then continue to trust some hack that has done zippo during his tenure just because he has a piece of paper laminated and hung on the wall behind his desk.

[buckboy]

Why does everyone say "Kidd has no experience" but are quick to say "he's a terrible coach"? Wouldn't that imply you haven't seen enough of him to judge whether he's a good coach or not?

He also had one of the best records in the league with the Nets after January 1st. Kidd did a lot with that ancient roster. I commend him wanting to get out of that situation. The Nets have zero future. They sold it away for a one year window at a title. Kidd sees our team, our youth, our new ownership, and sees somewhere he can get his career moving. I'm thrilled a coach wants to come to Milwaukee. I'm not saying we should make a big name move just to make a big name move, but it's the first step of getting free agents to play here down the line when our youthful team takes that next step towards contention and we have a spot that needs filled.

If it's just to coach and we're not giving up any 1st rounders, I'm 100% okay with the move. Hated Larry Drew for a while now. I don't know how I feel about the president role though since he has zero experience and I'd much prefer someone else running that aspect of the show. So I'm not onboard with the POBO title.

Also, real classy of everyone to bring up his DUI and off-the-court issues. What does that have to do with his ability to coach in the NBA?

So, I'm unclassy if I don't want a 6'4" 200# man who beat his wife representing my favorite franchise?

Whatever you say buddy.

I don't think it's the determining factor (inexperience would be for me), but it sure as hell doesn't help.

I don't like woman beaters. Sue me.

[Red Vines]

When Kidd was in NY he was respected by the players, coaches, everyone, and that's largely been the story of his career. Even last year the players eventually bought in. So I'm not sure about this sudden media blitz attack on him. Seems like the responsible thing to do is wait to hear Kidd's side of it, it's just a lot of speculation at this point. But, yeah, you don't just hand him the keys to your franchise at this point in his career. Then again, there are so many mediocre team execs in the NBA, you have to wonder if he couldn't do a better job. Anyway, it's nice to have some NBA buzz back in Milwaukee.

[Sherman Douglas]

If ur boss at work was a hack and u had the opportunity to tell the big boss that u think u can do a better job then why are u so wrong for doing so?

If I had been working there for a week and had been hired despite having no college degree and a checkered history, it would be wrong.

I get ur point but Billy Kings entire NBA accomplishment list is a joke on it's own. Kidds credentials as a player almost outweighs anything King has done. So while I agree with ur argument, it certainly doesn't apply here at all. I'd rather give a fresh start to an unknown and see what he's got then continue to trust some hack that has done zippo during his tenure just because he has a piece of paper laminated and hung on the wall behind his desk.

It's not an either or situation. The two options are not keep Billy King or hire Jason Kidd. Even if Billy King is not qualified for the job, Jason Kidd is even less qualified, so he has no right to try and push him out the door.

It was a power play by someone who had no leverage, which is why he's now trying to come here and rebound with us. And I can't believe anyone is actually for it.

[Faede]

This is interesting.

I guess it's debatable, but I thought what Jason Kidd did last season in Brooklyn was nothing short of amazing. Billy King (a notoriously horrid GM) and Prokhorov collected "trophy players". But, just look at that team as it was constructed. It's horrible! I guess I can't give Kidd any crap for complaining about the direction of the team. It's a cluster**** in Brooklyn and... here's the important part... IT STARTS WITH THE VISION FROM THE TOP!!

There's plenty of con's in this thread, so I am just going to throw out some pro's.

1. I like Jason Kidd as a coach. He did a great job last year taking a very poorly constructed team and turning it into a threat in the playoffs. What he got out of Livingston was nothing short of amazing and I think he has a nice motion offense that would give the team an actual direction. He preaches unselfish basketball and definitely aligns with our "development". I may be in the minority, but, I think he'd be a good coach aligning from the vision that Lasry and Edens are preaching.

2. His "issue" is with the vision of the Nets team. I guess I could be wrong, but, what I'm reading is that his biggest complaint with Prokhorov and King is that they use a "opportunistic" and "flashy" style that jumps on the new, shiny toy rather than taking a more measured approach. Again.. this is a vision thing. It's the owners that put the vision in place and the rest of upper management is responsible for making decisions in concert with that vision. If you have the right vision (which I believe Lasry and Edens do), aligning everyone toward that vision is the key to a successful business (see the business strategy books: Start with Why or Good to Great).

In essence, start with a successful, clear vision and find people who align to that vision. That is probably the most important fundamental principle of a successful business. I can't imagine Lasry and Edens would hire Kidd if he was not aligned to their vision. More so, from the reports, it sounds like that is exactly why Kidd was frustrated with the Nets organization. So it kind of makes sense to me.

3. I'm not concerned about this "overwhelming control" paranoia from this thread. I would imagine there would be a GM (Hammond or someone else) if Kidd was President and Coach. But make no mistake, it appears Lasry and Edens have the final say and there is no way they would allow something that didn't align with their vision of the team direction. Any trade or draft pick or move to be made is going to go through our new owners and their vision is a GREAT one!!

We'll see where this ends up, but, I certainly don't think it's time to panic. Our owners are smart, shrewd businessmen, who, from what I can tell use a very modern approach to their business strategies. I am completely on board with the vision they have presented and I have no doubt they will hire individuals who are aligned to their vision. I trust them! They have not given me a reason to do otherwise as of yet!!!

Just one guy's humble opinion.

[bizarro]

Also, Billy King has way more qualifications as an exec than Kidd.

Billy King was promoted to General Manager with only one year of experience. Hardly a sterling resume.

Exactly. And, obviously, there are two sides to the fence here. For every Ainge there's a Baylor. For every Riley there's a Michael Jordan. But, I think what I'm seeing more than anything is a reaction akin to what I experienced during the draft - i.e., I didn't see us go after players I really liked and I freaked out for a spell. In this scenario, we had a collective vision we'd get our Hinkie or we'd get someone directly from the Spurs tree. I would have fully supported that move. And, at the same time, I think people's opinions of Jason Kidd the person (or his public perception and reputation - accurate or not) are causing an emotional reaction of epic proportions. Nonsense like: "Oh, now they're moving to Seattle!" or "They're going to ruin our golden boys in Jabari and Giannis." I mean, come on. These are just as ludicrous and freaking out about this potential hiring, imho. Anyhow, just some thoughts. And, I'm not trying to point fingers at anyone. Rather, I'm recommending a collective pause, deep breath...it's all good.

[randy84]

What are the qualifications to be President of Basketball Operations anyways? I mean is there a major in basketball operations or some degree you can get?

[Profound23]

Why aren't we looking at Jerry Sloan? I understand not wanting Karl (although I would take him in a heartbeat) but Sloan?

That's a slamdunk!

[Thunder Muscle]

When I first heard this story break, I didn't know what to think. After 12+ hours, here are my thoughts at random...

I'd rather have Hammond as GM yet, and would be fine with Kidd as Coach. I don't see this scenario happening.

No way we should have to give any compensation to clean up the Nets' mess. Kidd hasn't proven anything to justify giving up assets.

Our owners aren't dummies and maybe Kidd does have a positive future as an executive. Best case scenario.

This is another smart ploy to keep people talking about the organization. Kind of like putting Mallory out there for the Lottery. Although the team for the most part is getting negative reaction.

The honeymoon is over and we're now into big decisions --- lets hope these owners truly are the people to turn this around. This is a shaky start. Buckle up.

[Rockmaninoff]

Why aren't we looking at Jerry Sloan? I understand not wanting Karl (although I would take him in a heartbeat) but Sloan?

That's a slamdunk!

Frankly, because he's too old.