Kohl and Hammond Working on Extension

xTitan · Post #21 » by **xTitan** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:32 pm

Kohl has always been team Skiles.......I must say this is a turn, just can't see him extending Hammond, doesn't fit the profile of the possible sale, plus nobody likes Hammond. I guess I will believe the extension when I see it.

BigDoggyStyle · Post #22 » by **BigDoggyStyle** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:33 pm

Just like the Bucks to play with our emotions. Skiles gets fired and it seems like things are headed in the right direction.

Then theres is talk of Hammond being extended immediately afterward.

europa · Post #23 » by **europa** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:33 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Hell when Kohl finally fired Dunleavy as coach he kept him around in the front office because he wouldn't pay him off.

Classic Kohl.

If we're going to look for a silver lining here maybe Hammond was able to convince Kohl that the Bucks could make the playoffs while playing guys like Harris and Henson more. That would accomplish at least some of what many of here want (youthful development) and what Kohl badly wants (playoff berth). I'd like to believe that if Hammond won this power struggle he did so with the belief the players he drafted (players Skiles refused to play consistently or at all in Tobes' case) can be critical components in a good team.

Dare to dream.

BucksRUS · Post #24 » by **BucksRUS** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:36 pm

It may also depend on what the new buyers want. Maybe they like Hammond and want him to be in place when they take over. Otherwise it doesn't make much sense.

LUKE23 · Post #25 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:36 pm

The only GM's I can see that have been with their teams greater than five years, and stayed after being sub .500 after five years are:

Petrie (Kings)
Colangelo (Raptors)
Grunfeld (Wizards)

Solid company.

europa · Post #26 » by **europa** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:37 pm

BucksRUS wrote:It may also depend on what the new buyers want. Maybe they like Hammond and want him to be in place when they take over.

I alluded to this as a possibility yesterday when the Aldridge story broke.

Nebula1 · Post #27 » by **Nebula1** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:41 pm

I honestly think this has all been by design and you will be pleasantly surprised with the next moves Hammond makes. This all reminds me so much of Morey and Houston. I hated all the Rockets teams he had put together prior to this season and then he flipped it on everybody. Hammond is about to do the same.

LittleRooster · Post #28 » by **LittleRooster** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:42 pm

DrugBust wrote:Haven't you guys been telling me that Hammond is actually smart and knows that tanking is the way to go but he simply wasn't able to?

Maybe the Senator's mind has changed after witnessing how futile it is to 'win-now'. Perhaps it's become evident that the Bucks need a rebuild, and the reason Skiles was let-go is it became apparent he wasn't the right guy to coach a young rebuilding squad?

It would make sense.

BucksRUS · Post #29 » by **BucksRUS** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:42 pm

Woelfuls Latest

Gery has a mention of a Hammond extension in his latest Bucks possible sale column.

LUKE23 · Post #30 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:43 pm

Well, to me, if this was "by design", we'd see trades now and not at the deadline to try and maximize draft position.

Kerb Hohl · Post #31 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:43 pm

I'm holding out the sliver of hope that Hammond really wants to rebuild and somehow convinced Kohl to do it.

We'll know the answer in the first move he makes under his new contract.

If he makes a trade to pick up some assets near the deadline, I may have hope.

If he trades Harris and filler for Jason Richardson, we will know that the Pittsburgh Pirates and Cleveland Browns have company.

Post #32 » by **ReasonablySober** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:44 pm

I know this board is bipolar, but don't most of us generally like the young assets the Bucks have?

europa · Post #33 » by **europa** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:45 pm

DrugBust wrote:I know this board is bipolar, but don't most of us generally like the young assets the Bucks have?

I think if Boylan trotted out a starting lineup tonight featuring Harris, Henson and Sanders many/most here would be very happy.

Post #34 » by **ReasonablySober** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:46 pm

GrendonJennings wrote:I'm holding out the sliver of hope that Hammond really wants to rebuild and somehow convinced Kohl to do it.

We'll know the answer in the first move he makes under his new contract.

If he makes a trade to pick up some assets near the deadline, I may have hope.

If he trades Harris and filler for Jason Richardson, we will know that the Pittsburgh Pirates and Cleveland Browns have company.

I'm feeling the same way. Scott Skiles was the only guy that I could with 100% certainty say wanted to win now. He's gone now, meaning we could be on our way to playing a lot of young guys and going for a higher pick.

You're right. It'll depend on our next roster move.

LUKE23 · Post #35 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:47 pm

DrugBust wrote:I know this board is bipolar, but don't most of us generally like the young assets the Bucks have?

Yes. But the pieces still aren't star ceiling drafting where we are, and the current GM sucks at win now moves (trades/FA). If we're allowed a full strip down/rebuild, then I don't think Hammond is the worst guy out there, in fact he could be good. If we are staying in win now mode (which I expect), keeping Hammond makes little to no sense.

Nebula1 · Post #36 » by **Nebula1** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:47 pm

Probably goes beyond Kohl. This is the NBA and David Stern.. if there is a sale involved, the NBA is involved and the direction of the franchise is involved no different than New Orleans. Stern has been very good about small franchises landing marquee players and I suspect will be a major player in this transaction.

If there truly is a behind the scenes team sale going down, that is.

InsideOut · Post #37 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:49 pm

LUKE23 wrote:The only GM's I can see that have been with their teams greater than five years, and stayed after being sub .500 after five years are:

Petrie (Kings)
Colangelo (Raptors)
Grunfeld (Wizards)

Solid company.

Par for the course when it comes to the Bucks.

So the hope Hammond gets an extension is because he convinced Kohl to tank? It would have been nice if they had figured out 5 years ago that this was the correct course of action all along. I'm interested in reading how the anti-tankers on the board would take the news if things get blown up and they start the tanking process.

Nebula1 · Post #38 » by **Nebula1** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:49 pm

europa wrote:
DrugBust wrote:I know this board is bipolar, but don't most of us generally like the young assets the Bucks have?

I think if Boylan trotted out a starting lineup tonight featuring Harris, Henson and Sanders many/most here would be very happy.

And plays Gooden a ton..

If the Bucks don't see 20 wins this season, I'm cool with that.

europa · Post #39 » by **europa** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:49 pm

BucksRUS wrote:Woelfuls Latest

Gery has a mention of a Hammond extension in his latest Bucks possible sale column.

Woelfel's right about Hammond being well respected around the league.

Post #40 » by **ReasonablySober** » Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:50 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
DrugBust wrote:I know this board is bipolar, but don't most of us generally like the young assets the Bucks have?

Yes. But the pieces still aren't star ceiling drafting where we are, and the current GM sucks at win now moves (trades/FA). If we're allowed a full strip down/rebuild, then I don't think Hammond is the worst guy out there, in fact he could be good. If we are staying in win now mode (which I expect), keeping Hammond makes little to no sense.

I just don't understand the timing of Skiles being let-go if the Bucks didn't see themselves as a win-now team.