RealGM

Chris Sheridan wrote a story today listing the coaches on the hot seat. Here is what he wrote about Krystkowiak:

THE OUTSIDERS

Larry Krystkowiak, Bucks
Everything about the guy kind of screams "interim," and it'd be hard to argue with owner Sen. Herb Kohl if he decided his franchise had a better chance to make a push for the playoffs with a more experienced leader at the helm. And with a lot of big names currently unemployed (Rick Carlisle, Scott Skiles, Jeff Van Gundy, Larry Brown), you could see where there might be a desire on ownership's part to make what, on paper at least, would be an upgrade. Losing to Detroit by 45 points on New Year's Eve didn't help Coach K's cause, but Wednesday night's road victory in Miami was a nice bounce-back. Odds: 15-1

For the love of god, if we fire LK it better be for one of those experienced replacements.


I HATE the fact we're on our THIRD rookie coach and we still don't understand why we're underachieving.

If I have to watch another rookie coach learn on the job, I might just lose it.


Edit: Rick Carlisle would be my #1 coach, Skiles my #2, JVG #3 and Brown a distant 4th


How ironic would it be if LK got fired for Skiles?

I think Larry Brown would be exacty what our players would need. An experienced coach who HAS won before and knows what it takes to win.

Larry Brown would leave in a year. No thanks.

EastSideBucksFan wrote:For the love of god, if we fire LK it better be for one of those experienced replacements.


I HATE the fact we're on our THIRD rookie coach and we still don't understand why we're underachieving.
If I have to watch another rookie coach learn on the job, I might just lose it.


Edit: Rick Carlisle would be my #1 coach, Skiles my #2, JVG #3 and Brown a distant 4th


How ironic would it be if LK got fired for Skiles?

Thank You! I hate saying this over and over again... But a young/inexperienced coach is not a good fit for a young team... Fire Larry and bring in one of those guys!

I would love Larry Brown as long as he is his post Knicks insane self.

Why would he leave? Age?

I don't think he would take the job though, nor any other top flight coach at this time.

More sportswriters' idle speculation and lazy thinking. So appealing to readers too lazy to learn the progressions of head coaching in the NBA. On both sides pure scapegoating which both aggrandizes and demeans the role of a head coach in team winning percentage.

Rick Carlisle or JFG would be th eonly coaches I would want.

That would be funny if we brought Terry Porter back... kinda like bringing back Mason after Harris snaked him.

Epicurus wrote:More sportswriters' idle speculation and lazy thinking. So appealing to readers too lazy to learn the progressions of head coaching in the NBA. On both sides pure scapegoating which both aggrandizes and demeans the role of a head coach in team winning percentage.

I hear you Epi. I have no idea what the hell you're saying but I hear you.

I would love for Porter to come back. I liked Porter alot.

Epicurus wrote:More sportswriters' idle speculation and lazy thinking. So appealing to readers too lazy to learn the progressions of head coaching in the NBA. On both sides pure scapegoating which both aggrandizes and demeans the role of a head coach in team winning percentage.

i knew my dictionary widget would come in handy one day.

aggrandize: to increase the power, status or wealth of.

BucksRuleAll22 wrote:I would love for Porter to come back. I liked Porter alot.

Porter was useless.

MickeyDavis wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Porter was useless.

Damn man did Porter snub you when you asked him for an autograph or something?

Everytime Porter's name comes up you say something real negative about him,the guy wasnt that bad of a coach.

All he did was get a team with 20/25 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

Stotts and Larry K can't get teams with 40/45 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

I know you are going to say no one has hired him as head coach but just give it time Porter will be a head coach agian in the NBA.Besides its not like Porter is out of the NBA,being an assistant with a class & winning franchise like the Detroit Pistons isnt exactly a bad gig.



As for Larry K he was a scrub as a player and its become apparent hes a scrub a s an NBA head coach,fire his ass and hire JVG.

Porter did ok and his team probably overachieved. But he couldn't even draw up an in bound play during timeouts. Porter is one of the nicest guys I've ever met from the Bucks organization and one day he may be a good coach. But he wasn't when he was here.

15-1 odds? Does this writer actually have contacts within the bucks organization, or is he just pulling this number out of his ass? With these odds, it would be almost impossible for him not to get fired.

Give me JVG, he'll bring a defensive minded attitude and he'll utilize our big men.

[quote="rilamann"]-= original quote snipped =-



Damn man did Porter snub you when you asked him for an autograph or something?

Everytime Porter's name comes up you say something real negative about him,the guy wasnt that bad of a coach.

All he did was get a team with 20/25 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

Stotts and Larry K can't get teams with 40/45 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

I know you are going to say no one has hired him as head coach but just give it time Porter will be a head coach agian in the NBA.Besides its not like Porter is out of the NBA,being an assistant with a class & winning franchise like the Detroit Pistons isnt exactly a bad gig.



As for Larry K he was a scrub as a player and its become apparent hes a scrub a s an NBA head coach,fire his ass and hire JVG.[/quote

First of all, exactly how did you evaluate that talent on paper??? Must be some really scientific method maybe you should share with members of the NBA executive offices. Assuming you are correct then Stotts achieved the 40 win number he had the talent for and made the play-offs. How did that Reiner, Boykins, Ersan, Noel line-up do on your paper talent scale???

bigzy wrote:

rilamann wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Damn man did Porter snub you when you asked him for an autograph or something?

Everytime Porter's name comes up you say something real negative about him,the guy wasnt that bad of a coach.

All he did was get a team with 20/25 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

Stotts and Larry K can't get teams with 40/45 win talent on paper into the playoffs.

I know you are going to say no one has hired him as head coach but just give it time Porter will be a head coach agian in the NBA.Besides its not like Porter is out of the NBA,being an assistant with a class & winning franchise like the Detroit Pistons isnt exactly a bad gig.



As for Larry K he was a scrub as a player and its become apparent hes a scrub a s an NBA head coach,fire his ass and hire JVG.[/quote

First of all, exactly how did you evaluate that talent on paper??? Must be some really scientific method maybe you should share with members of the NBA executive offices. Assuming you are correct then Stotts achieved the 40 win number he had the talent for and made the play-offs. How did that Reiner, Boykins, Ersan, Noel line-up do on your paper talent scale???

Stotts first year WAS NOT a 40 win talent team. There should have been 4 or 5 more wins if not more. You had TJ, Mo, Simmons, Redd, Bogut, Magloire, Joe Smith, Charlie Bell, and Toni Kukoc. That was a good team with depth.

Stotts first year had TJ/Mo/Redd/Simmons/Magloire/Smith/Bogut/Bell. And that is when Simmons and Magloire were still solid players. That should have been more than 40 wins.