Page 1 of 3

Blowouts (The Porter and Stotts Appreciation Thread)

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:59 pm
by Rockmaninoff
I define a blowout as a victory or loss by 20 or more points. Everyone hates watching their favorite team get blown out.

Terry Porter Blowout Losses - 03/04
Against the Grizzlies (50-32) - Lost by 20
Against the Pacers (61-21) - Lost by 33

Terry Porter Blowout Wins - 03/04
Against the Bulls (23-59) - Won by 30
Against the Raptors (33-49) - Won by 20
Against the Magic (21-61) - Won by 23
Against the Wizards (25-57) - Won by 28

Terry Porter Blowout Losses - 04/05
Against the Spurs (59-23) - Lost by 21
Against the Hawks (13-69) - Lost by 23
Against the Pistons (54-28) - Lost by 24
Against the Heat (59-23) - Lost by 39
Against the Pistons (54-28) - Lost by 26

Terry Porter Blowout Wins - 04/05
Against the Rockets (51-31) - Won by 28
Against the Nets (42-40) - Won by 23
Against the Celtics (45-37) - Won by 24
Against the Hawks (13-69) - Won by 30
Against the Sonics (52-30) - Won by 26

Terry Stotts Blowout Losses - 05/06
Against the Clippers (47-35) - Lost by 24
Against the Kings (44-38) - Lost by 21
Against the Jazz (41-41) - Lost by 20
Against the Pacers (41-41) - Lost by 24
Against the Heat (52-30) - Lost by 26

Terry Stotts Blowout Wins - 05/06
Against the Magic (36-46) - Won by 20
Against the Knicks (23-59) - Won by 20
Against the Raptors (27-55) - Won by 21
Against the Nuggets (44-38) - Won by 21
Against the Suns (54-28) - Won by 22
Against the Pistons (64-18) - Won by 20 (2nd to last game of season)

Terry Stotts/Larry Krystkowiak Blowout Losses/Wins 06/07
I'm throwing this season out because of the massive starter minutes lost to injury, the eventual tanking, and because Stotts was fired during the season

Larry Krystkowiak Blowout Losses - 07/08
Against the Spurs (28-16) - Lost by 25
Against the Pistons (32-13) - Lost by 26
Against the Warriors (28-19) - Lost by 30
Against the Celtics (35-8) - Lost by 22
Against the Nuggets (27-18) - Lost by 20
Against the Pistons (32-13) - Lost by 45
Against the Wizards (28-19) - Lost by 24
Against the Warriors (28-19) - Lost by 20
Against the Raptors (25-20) - Lost by 31
Against the Sixers (18-28) - Lost by 43

Larry Krystkowiak Blowout Wins - 07/08
Against the Raptors (25-20) - Won by 27 (Tony Brown substituting in the absence of Krystkowiak)

So, what is it? Is Krystkowiak as bad as I think he is? Is it our overpaid malcontents? Is it the hair gel? Is it the the basketball decisions made by people who don't understand basketball? How can a professional team get blown out this often?

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:07 pm
by Bucks_Revenge
It's bad when you lose by 49 by anyone....it reflects on the players and then the coach I dont think the coaches respect him...like they did porter....say all you want to say about porter how he was a bad hire but if you went to the player on those teams they will say they will fight for him becasue he commanded so much respect and they played hard for him......LH never gave porter any talent to work with but he manage to get them into the playoffs the first and he also allowed us to get Bogut so we owe him allot..

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:13 pm
by Fight the Tank
Does anyone have any inside info on why Porter was fired? That was the last time I think I actually enjoyed watching the team play. They pushed the ball, played hard and competed on a daily basis with less than average talent.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:14 pm
by WEFFPIM
To answer all of your questions are the bottom of your post, yes. To all of them.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:14 pm
by Rockmaninoff
Bogutneedsball wrote:Does anyone have any inside info on why Porter was fired? That was the last time I think I actually enjoyed watching the team play. They pushed the ball, played hard and competed on a daily basis with less than average talent.


I still believe it was because he didn't want Bogut, but I've been told that I'm wrong on that.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:15 pm
by Fight the Tank
Rockmaninoff wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I still believe it was because he didn't want Bogut, but I've been told that I'm wrong on that.


Still a bad decision to fire him if that was the case.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:16 pm
by Bucks_Revenge
Bogutneedsball wrote:Does anyone have any inside info on why Porter was fired? That was the last time I think I actually enjoyed watching the team play. They pushed the ball, played hard and competed on a daily basis with less than average talent.



LH thought he was going to hire Doug Collins for sure so he fired porter a month after he said he wouldn't...but Collins backed out the last minute and Kohl told Harris to hire Stotts....

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:18 pm
by Fight the Tank
[quote="Bucks_Revenge"]-= original quote snipped =-




LH thought he was going to hire Doug Collins for sure so he fired porter a month after he said he wouldn't...but Collins backed out the last minute and Kohl told Harris to hire Stotts....[/quote

Blind leading the blind.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:41 pm
by ReasonablySober
Wow.

Nice work on this thread. Looking at this:

Larry Kristkowiak Blowout Losses - 07/08
Against the Spurs (28-16) - Lost by 25
Against the Pistons (32-13) - Lost by 26
Against the Warriors (28-19) - Lost by 30
Against the Celtics (35-8) - Lost by 22
Against the Nuggets (27-18) - Lost by 20
Against the Pistons (32-13) - Lost by 45
Against the Wizards (28-19) - Lost by 24
Against the Warriors (28-19) - Lost by 20
Against the Raptors (25-20) - Lost by 31
Against the Sixers (18-28) - Lost by 43

Larry Kristkowiak Blowout Wins - 07/08
Against the Raptors (25-20) - Won by 27 (Tony Brown substituting in the absence of Kristkowiak)


is pretty disturbing.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:44 pm
by jerrod
DrugBust wrote:
is pretty disturbing.


i know right

i mean, it's not like his name is that hard to spell :D


oh, the blowouts aren't good either

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:45 pm
by Newz
This thread is depressing. :(

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:52 pm
by Rockmaninoff
jerrod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



i know right

i mean, it's not like his name is that hard to spell :D


oh, the blowouts aren't good either


:rofl:

Ok, it's Kryst like tryst...I thought he would be fired by now, so I never learned how to spell it. Fixed.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:17 pm
by BuckFan25226
I've said this since people wanted Stotts gone. I don't know what kind of coach Stotts could of become or what kind of coach he will become. But the guy knew what the hell he was doing as far as utilizing his guys on the offensive end. I know some still wanted Bogut force-fed, and rapid ball movement until there is 5 seconds to go on the shot clock. But the bottom line is, Stotts made had this team scoring points night in and night out.

Our offense right looks absolutely pathetic. I have no idea what Coach K is trying to do with this slow it down, grind it out offense. And why he would make such drastic changes on offense from what TS was doing is beyond me.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:45 pm
by Raptors90102
You know Larry K has serious issues when he votes for RASHARD LEWIS for the AllStar reserves!

Need I say more??

- Just a quick sidenote from the Mil-Philly game last night. The guy is just lost out there coaching this team. He has no clue how to put an offensive-system in. I remember, when Sam Mitchell became the Raps coach, their entire offensive system changed, and very quickly at that. The became a highly efficient offensive team. Heck, even when they had that 27 win season, they still ranked top 5 in offensive efficiency. They didn't have the defensive players to play defence, but still they scored a lotta points. Smitch knew what he could get out of his depleted-offensive minded team, and he got it out of em. Larry K must realise that his team is not defensively capable to play grid it out basketball night in, night out and he needs to play to his team's strength (offense) instead of emphasizing on defence more than offence.. cuz thats not what this team is made for.

Look at Smitch now, he has gotten some good defensive players this year on the team, and the Raps rank in top 12/13 in defensive efficiency and as a result, he has slowed down on the offensive end a bit, playing a bit slower brand of basketball than his previous all-out scoring teams. Larry K needs to adjust. He has had enough time to put some sort of system in place. If he can't figure it out after being incharge for almost a year now, he ain't bright enough to be a Head Coach than.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:07 pm
by trwi7
Stotts had this team scoring more points starting the likes of Lynn Greer, Ersan Ilyasova, Jared Reiner and Brian Skinner. Truly scary.

In games we're winning we outscore the opponent by an average of 7.2 points. In games we're losing we get outscored by an average of 15.5 points. :-?

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:13 pm
by bango_the_buck
Raptors90102 wrote:Larry K must realise that his team is not defensively capable to play grid it out basketball night in, night out and he needs to play to his team's strength (offense) instead of emphasizing on defence more than offence.. cuz thats not what this team is made for.


This is exactly why the Bucks are struggling and why Stotts got fired.
The roster (for the most part) is full of perimeter oriented, non-defensive minded players. Stotts knew this and decided his best chance to win was to run the offense through Redd and Mo (with the bigs' primary role being as screen setters) and try and outscore people. I can't say that I argue with that assessment (particularly since Bogut really wasn't ready to be the focal point of the offense). In a league where the bottom line is winning, he didn't think he had the time (or victories) to 'waste' on developing his young center. Of course, he was right (though he also couldn't afford not too)...

Management disagreed with this style of play and wanted more of an inside/outside share-the-wealth type offense and a greater emphasis on defense (and so do I). So they brought in LK who shares this vision. But as of yet, the vision hasn't translated into wins. Growing pains can be expected when trying to teach a team as young (and soft) as ours to play the 'right way'. Some teams (like Portland or Chicago of a few years ago) get it right away, so its frustrating that it hasn't happened yet. Whether that's because of the players or the coach (or some combination), I'm not sure. At some point you figure the light-bulb will go on and this team will start living up to its potential. But you have to give them enough time and opportunity for that to happen - and that of course requires patience (not something anyone wants to hear). Once you're sure that it just isn't going to work (and I don't think we are there just yet), then you blow it up and find the pieces that fit your system and vision.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:48 pm
by old skool
I think we fans tend to oversimplify things when it comes to coaches winning in the NBA.

Look at Lawrence Frank. Obviously a coaching genius, he won a zillion in a row (or sixteen or something) when he took over the Nets in mid-year from Byron Scott. Now his team is a loser, the bum.

Byron Scott was obviously no good, or he would not have failed with the Nets. And his Hornets lost another game last night to the Warriors! That's like his second loss this month, the bum.

Look at Scott Skiles. He had a proven winner. A team that had been to the playoffs three straight years and was only going to get better with all their youth. And he couldn't get them to play even .500 ball this year, the bum.

Look at Stan Van Gundy. He couldn't get the Heat to win anything, forcing coaching genius Riley to come down from above and lead the Heat to a championship. Stan couldn't coach a team if he was given a magic wand, the bum.

Riley's a genius. He's got the Heat primed this year. All they have to do is sneak into the playoffs and they'll win every series, seeing as they have rested themselves during the regular season, the genius.

Was Krystkowiak a great coach when the Bucks won in Philly January 8 and a bad coach last night? Was LK a good coach when the Bucks were on their five game winning streak earlier this season and a bad coach this month?

The black and white answers seem too simplistic too me.

oLd sKool

Posted: Fri Feb 1, 2008 3:12 am
by Epicurus
"Terry Stotts/Larry Krystkowiak Blowout Losses/Wins 06/07
I'm throwing this season out because of the massive starter minutes lost to injury, the eventual tanking, and because Stotts was fired during the season "

The Bucks lost 4 games by 20 or more (at least by my quick count)points during Stotts 60+ games in '07. Given what was available on the court in January and early Feb., that so few was a minor miracle.

Posted: Fri Feb 1, 2008 4:50 am
by Rockmaninoff
Epicurus wrote:"Terry Stotts/Larry Krystkowiak Blowout Losses/Wins 06/07
I'm throwing this season out because of the massive starter minutes lost to injury, the eventual tanking, and because Stotts was fired during the season "

The Bucks lost 4 games by 20 or more (at least by my quick count)points during Stotts 60+ games in '07. Given what was available on the court in January and early Feb., that so few was a minor miracle.


I agree, and I defended Stotts on a different fan forum last year. He was a good coach. That he was fired in favor of a person with no NBA coaching experience (besides 60+ games as an assistant), because said person was receiving interest from a college program, and because he was fired as a scapegoat, is a travesty.

A poster above tried to say that this thread is an oversimplification. That coaching success in the NBA is due to a variety of things, available player talent topping that list. And, I agree that it isn't black or white, good or evil. But, and this is a big but, what I was trying to show is that good coaches get the most out of the talent that is available to them. The only 'right way' is the way that wins games. Or, at least prevents continuous blowouts. It's pretty sad when almost 20% of the games played this season, have ended in blowout losses.

Porter, Stotts, and Krystkowiak have all not had the best talent with which to work. We can go in circles debating why that is (is it Harris? is it Kohl and cronies? is it some sick combination?). But, which of those three coaches is getting the least out of the talent that is available to them?

I hope to see Porter and Stotts both get second and third chances (respectively) as NBA Head Coaches. They deserve it.

Posted: Fri Feb 1, 2008 5:49 am
by paulpressey25
This was pretty good research.....and seems to point out that Larry K. isn't getting anywhere with any of these guys.

But to say we want Stotts back is ludicrous......We've know learned this past month that Bogut can indeed average 18ppg.....and the team can play .450 ball while doing it.....

Don't we want to learn that about our 23 year old center before we pay him a ton of money when his contract is up?

People forget that Stotts one "big" year the team had a heck of a lot more talent on it (Kukoc, Joe Smith, TJ, Magloire) and still only got to 40-wins.

Smallball with Mo and Redd was going nowhere fast......better we build halfcourt ball around Bogut. Or at least try to see if we can do that with our #1 overall pick......