JSOnline: Bucks ready to use merit system

-Jragon- · Post #1 » by **-Jragon-** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:24 pm

Krystkowiak now has a lot of options for his rotation.

With Redd back, Mo Williams has returned to point guard and Royal Ivey to the bench. Getting extended playing time in several consecutive games, Williams was playing some of the best basketball of his career last week before finally hitting the wall in Phoenix. In Redd's absence, Williams and Ivey showed that they can be an effective backcourt duo, which may come in handy down the road. Also, Charlie Bell seems to have found himself and is frequently playing the entire fourth quarter.

At power forward, Charlie Villanueva and Yi Jianlian continue to split the playing time, although Krystkowiak is intrigued at the prospect of playing Bobby Simmons more at power forward. That would probably mean some time at small forward for Redd.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Merit system is a good motivational tool for everybody to hustle, work hard, and play together in the game. The only way it backfires is if people are on the bench unfairly that ARE playing hard and well. We're going to find out with Larry K. is made of and what he has learned this year.

If you were coaching the Bucks on a merit system who would be earning the most extra playing time for you and who would be benched more?

More playing time:
Ivey
Bogut
Ruffin
Bell

More bench time:
Simmons
Redd

Debit One · Post #2 » by **Debit One** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:31 pm

At power forward, Charlie Villanueva and Yi Jianlian continue to split the playing time, although Krystkowiak is intrigued at the prospect of playing Bobby Simmons more at power forward.

Please, let's not revert to small ball. I understand that CV and Yi are not the bruisers that we would like to have at PF, but for the love of all that is holy do NOT play Simmons at PF.

europa · Post #3 » by **europa** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:36 pm

I don't like the idea of playing Redd or Bell at SF or playing Simmons at PF but given how the Bucks don't have a SF and given how Yi is struggling and Villanueva wildly inconsistent (to put it mildly) I'm not sure what other options Krystkowiak has - especially if Bell continues to play well and Simmons shows more signs of turning his game around.

If both Bell and Simmons are playing well I think the Bucks' best option in crunch time might be a lineup of:

PG: Mo
SG: Redd
SF: Bell
PF: Simmons
C: Bogut

Can't say I like it much nor do I think it will lead to much success but given the other options available I'm not sure Krystkowiak will have many other choices.

Epicurus · Post #4 » by **Epicurus** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:41 pm

Yes, Ivey outplays say Redd and will get more time. Yes, owners and gms who got owners to pay huge amounts for Redd would love such a system. Sure it will happen in my lifetime.

When is merit established anyway? On the basis of each stint on court? a game? 5 games? week? possession? past season?

Good reporter: Sorry, coach, but what the hell are you talking about?

BrewCityBBQ · Post #5 » by **BrewCityBBQ** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:44 pm

Ahh yes the good old merit system. But will it translate into wins?

europa · Post #6 » by **europa** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:45 pm

Jbizzness wrote:Ahh yes the good old merit system. But will it translate into wins?

If it means using Redd or Bell at SF or using Simmons at PF probably not very many. But that's what happens when you don't have a SF and your PF position isn't performing consistently.

-Jragon- · Post #7 » by **-Jragon-** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:36 pm

Epicurus wrote:Yes, Ivey outplays say Redd and will get more time. Yes, owners and gms who got owners to pay huge amounts for Redd would love such a system. Sure it will happen in my lifetime.

When is merit established anyway? On the basis of each stint on court? a game? 5 games? week? possession? past season?
Good reporter: Sorry, coach, but what the hell are you talking about?

Good question. I was assuming game by game. Wasn't Coach K on the lookout for 5 guys that were willing to play hard a few weeks ago? Must not have found them.

unklchuk · Post #8 » by **unklchuk** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:47 pm

I frankly read the article as largely coach's wishful thinking.

Didn't seem probably that he could implement it in a way that would have everyone on the same page. Didn't seem to have enough specifics to be "real."

NBA coaches have to balance a lot of ****. This merit system seems like an oversimplification.

Wouldn't mind being proved wrong.

-Jragon- · Post #9 » by **-Jragon-** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:13 pm

europa wrote:
If both Bell and Simmons are playing well I think the Bucks' best option in crunch time might be a lineup of:

PG: Mo
SG: Redd
SF: Bell
PF: Simmons
C: Bogut

Can't say I like it much nor do I think it will lead to much success but given the other options available I'm not sure Krystkowiak will have many other choices.

I'm willing to give it a try. Bell doesn't like playing sf, but he seems to be successful given that he can defend the position well and usually creates match up problems offensively for others teams. He can even play some point forward for us, if you will, to take some "heat" off of Mo.

Same with Simmons at the 4. Honestly, he looks like Anthony Mason out there trying to cover the NBA's speedy small forwards (slow.)

Badgerlander · Post #10 » by **Badgerlander** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:29 pm

I like Redd at the 3 and Mo at the 2 (mostly because it gives us more potential for dribble penetration off the wing), but there is no reason for Simmons to play the 4. Hell, if we aren't gonna play defense why not call up Sessions to play the point, put CV at the 4, Yi at center, and see if we can just outscore other teams.

coolhandluke121 · Post #11 » by **coolhandluke121** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:11 pm

I agree that they should play some more 3-guard line-ups in order to find minutes for Ivey and Bell, who are far more capable defenders than Mo, Redd, or Simmons. I don't necessarily agree with Simmons at pf, but he is actually a lot stronger and more physical than CV so who knows, maybe it wouldn't hurt for 7-10 mpg. Conventional wisdom says Ruffin should get those pf minutes (duh!), but the league has changed a bit.

-Jragon- · Post #12 » by **-Jragon-** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:22 pm

Debit One wrote:At power forward, Charlie Villanueva and Yi Jianlian continue to split the playing time, although Krystkowiak is intrigued at the prospect of playing Bobby Simmons more at power forward.

Please, let's not revert to small ball. I understand that CV and Yi are not the bruisers that we would like to have at PF, but for the love of all that is holy do NOT play Simmons at PF.

I'll play positionally small with C. Bell or Redd at 3 or Simmons at 4. If our smaller player can still cover their man, it gives us a great opportunity to keep someone with a hot hand in the game against someone who may not be able to keep up with them. It also gets someone cold out of the game. It is a falacy to me that just because a player is large enough to play a postion that playing time should be automatically awarded playing time even if they aren't being effective. Bigger isn't better; Better is better.

Anyways, it will not be small ball; we will still have Bogut in the game. Isn't "small ball" traditionally defined as playing with all guards and forwards for example when Karl had Big Dog playing center with 4 guards?

Rockmaninoff · Post #13 » by **Rockmaninoff** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:27 pm

At least he (Krystkowiak) has given up on defense. Now, it's just effort that he is looking for.

"Hard work isn't going to guarantee success but I know with our team, without it, we don't have a chance. That's a given for sure." - Coach K keeping it real.

The jist of this article for me, besides the fact that Redd compared himself to LeBron James, is that some of the injuries have forced Larry K to tighten the rotation, and just play the guys he has. Is this going to change with guys coming back?

I prefer a tight rotation, with all players knowing their roles and getting consistant minutes, health permitting. Too many options, makes Larry K. think too much. And, we all know how hard that is to do, while watching the game.

Max Green · Post #14 » by **Max Green** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:28 pm

Playing Bobby Simmons at PF is a joke. Larry K is joke. Merit System?? This isn't some mid-major college team, fire this clown please and bring in JVG.

Rockmaninoff · Post #15 » by **Rockmaninoff** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:32 pm

MVP4Champ wrote:Playing Bobby Simmons at PF is a joke. Larry K is joke. Merit System?? This isn't some mid-major college team, fire this clown please and bring in JVG.

It's not that bad of an idea if he was backing up a real PF (Boozer) and Villanueva and Yi were never on the team.

Cold Crush 24 · Post #16 » by **Cold Crush 24** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:42 pm

Bobby Simmons is a terrible idea at the four. Ruffin should get more pt at the four and CV should slide to the three spot. How obvious is this. Yet the coaching staff refuses to let CV get any good minutes where he played well in Toronto. With Dez out I would have CV starting there.

BucksRuleAll22 · Post #17 » by **BucksRuleAll22** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:47 pm

Anybody that gives Michael Ruffin playing time deserves to be fired.

Cold Crush 24 · Post #18 » by **Cold Crush 24** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:52 pm

Hey its slim pickins when it comes to bigs on this bench. I cant wait till Kohl fires Larry K after this year and hires a rookie coach with ties to Milwaukee in some way. I wonder what Glenn Robinson is doing these days? Im sure he'd love to be a head coach!

-Jragon- · Post #19 » by **-Jragon-** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:04 pm

BucksRuleAll22 wrote:Anybody that gives Michael Ruffin playing time deserves to be fired.

Wow, that seems really off base. Ruffin was an enforcer last night; a game changing player on defense, and should never have been pulled for Yi in the 4th. Yi was the weak spot at the end of that game.

Cold Crush 24 wrote:Hey its slim pickins when it comes to bigs on this bench. I cant wait till Kohl fires Larry K after this year and hires a rookie coach with ties to Milwaukee in some way. I wonder what Glenn Robinson is doing these days? Im sure he'd love to be a head coach!

Sippin' 40's and smokin' blunts.

Rockmaninoff · Post #20 » by **Rockmaninoff** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:13 pm

Dennis Rodman wrote: Wow, that seems really off base. Ruffin was an enforcer last night; a game changing player on defense

I agree. Ruffin deserves no criticism. He knows his role and does it well every time. He would be the perfect 10-15 min per game backup to a 33-38 min per game, fully developed Yi. Too bad that isn't the case right now.

Props, Dennis. You were one of my favorite players ever.