RealGM

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=728784

Says he had to implement a new system and change it, and had locker room issues, well isn't that coaches job to keep both of those under control?

Typical MJS fluff garbage.

Yawn

I don't think that coaches have that much control in the NBA.

Look at the Scott Skiles failure. All of a sudden he couldn't coach, after years of success?

The NBA is a players league and the players set the tone. The players do what they want, more often than not.

oLd sKool

Journal Sentinel Article wrote:"I think he's learned a lot," said Tony Brown, the team's lead assistant coach. "He had a little bit last year when he could kind of get a feel for the job. Then this year he's got it all. We've had all kinds of things. With the injuries and rotations and guys wanting to be traded . . . that kind of thing. But I think that's typical of any NBA team. You're going to go through bumps over the course of the season and I think he's handled it pretty well. We're all learning . . . trying to learn these players and trying to get a good feel for what we want from them."

Who do you think he is referring to?

Mo?
Villanueva?
Charlie Bell?

I never knew that anyone officially wanted out.

This has perhaps been pointed out, but I was thinking today about the Carlisle rumor and it begins to make some sense when you consider that you'd expect Kohl to have fired LH by now if he knew who he wanted as GM. But if you want Carlisle as both coach and GM it might make more sense to let LK play out the string...let him take all these losses and give Carlisle a chance to come in during the summer. Plus if you think the team is going nowhere it gives Carlisle a better draft pick as well.

Just a thought.

ReddManBogieMan wrote:Who do you think he is referring to?

Mo?
Villanueva?
Charlie Bell?

I never knew that anyone officially wanted out.

I think BuckSkins or someone with insider knowledge suggested a number of guys (was it like six or something?) told management they'd be happy to get out. Not necessarily guys demanding to be traded obviously, but apparently they let management know they'd be interested in it.

old skool wrote:I don't think that coaches have that much control in the NBA.

Look at the Scott Skiles failure. All of a sudden he couldn't coach, after years of success?

The NBA is a players league and the players set the tone. The players do what they want, more often than not.

oLd sKool

Agree with you on that totally. All it takes are a few bad apples to destroy what a coach wishes to imply strategy wise.

People want to compare Stotts and Krystkowiak as coaches, but really Stotts just let them play their own stlye, and Larry wanted to establish a system. Neither had major success, which makes me believe that it isn't the coach but the players **cough ** cough Mo Williams. At least L.K. has tried to be an authority figure, something that all good coaches are, instead of just sitting on the sidelines looking like nothing is the matter, like T.S. did all the time. I believe that L.K. is a good coach and somebody that with the right players could lead them to success, but I think he needs to get a veteran leader on the team to complement Bogut's leadership. I never felt that Stotts was the answer, just some guy George Karl would tell to go and find out opposing teams pros and cons.

What I'm saying is T.S. didn't have leadership, where as LK does, IMO. But TS had guys like Kukoc, Ervin Johnson, Magliore, Joe Smith to assist in being leaders in the locker room. Where L.K. only has Bogut, Mason, Redd, Williams, and maybe voskuhl.

Give L.K. some solid leaders, not these Charmin- soft pre-madonnas who all want the ball and expect to see better results. It's hard to build around a group of young guys and expect them to already have veteran leadership. Mason, Jake, and bogut are all good leaders but Jake hardly plays and Mason is the 5th option. See what I'm saying.
Anyway that 's just my 2 cents worth.

READ THE SIG

Absolute bull, not worthy of further comment. You have no damned idea of the detail of Stotts' offense. If anything it was too complex (at least as seen by LK).

Bucks_Revenge wrote:READ THE SIG:
Andrew Bogut wrote:
No matter how many leaders you have, when you keep shuffling things around, you have six or seven new players each year, it doesn't help the chemistry of a team.

Yeah I agree somewhat, but when the GM knows that the players on the team don't have a positive affect on Chemistry, than a roster shakeup is in order. You can't build a house when the foundation is sand.

Epicurus wrote:Absolute bull, not worthy of further comment. You have no damned idea of the detail of Stotts' offense. If anything it was too complex (at least as seen by LK).

You missed what I said. Which you do often. I complemented T.S. on his high b-ball IQ which was a reason why he was hired in the first place, but I said he wasn't a great leader. He let Redd do what he does best which is shoot, he let TJ do what he did best which is play borderline out of control, so basically he let the players who where there the longest do their own thing. Is that not a correct statement?

I'm sorry if I make rash general statements when recalling Stotts' days as Coach, but I don't feel the need to recap his entire philosophies every time I mention his name. You have a personal connection to him which I respect, but I just didn't care for him as a head coach and neither did a lot of other bucks fans.

Let me state for the record that Terry Stotts has an exceptional grasp on running an offense. Just not a team. And more specifically not that bucks team. Are we clear?

Giving guards the green light to shoot jumpers all game, and put no emphasis on getting the big guy into the game is what led to him leaving town(plus a string of injuries but the writing was already on the wall). Whether you believe it's the right or wrong thing that should have been done, it is what happened.

ReddManBogieMan wrote:Giving guards the green light to shoot jumpers all game, and put no emphasis on getting the big guy into the game is what led to him leaving town(plus a string of injuries but the writing was already on the wall). Whether you believe it's the right or wrong thing that should have been done, it is what happened.

That's not why Stotts got fired

He got fired for the same reason most losing franchises cycle through head coaches every few years in nearly all pro sports, poor talent. I do believe there are better coaches, weaker coaches, and some in the middle, but for the most part, head coaches are at the mercy of the talent they have to work with.

It's amusing how every coach for ages hired by the Bucks comes in and says how they are going to improve the sad defense which far and away has kept this franchise stuck in the mud. Yet, it never gets better because the roster always has to many poor defenders on it.

I've used this analogy before because i think it's so fitting. The Bucks are like a baseball team that every year has a poor pitching staff that finishes at the bottom of the league in allowing runs. Then the team constantly hires new pitching coaches in hopes of allowing few runs and it never produces that result because the pitchers on the roster suck. At some point if the team wants a pitching staff that doesn't finish at the bottom in runs allowed, they need to acquire some pitchers that are actually good and stop expecting a pitching coach to perform a miracle.

I'd rather we hired a more proven head coach, but no coach could make these rosters the Bucks put together be a good team.

LUKE23 wrote:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=728784

Says he had to implement a new system and change it, and had locker room issues, well isn't that coaches job to keep both of those under control?

Typical MJS fluff garbage.

More bullslut excuses...Other coaches had them too!

Mike Woodson dealt with it too in Atlanta and Mo Cheeks did in Philly, much less Jim Boylan in Chicago and look at their teams!

Typical loser city, teams, and newspaper media make excuses...Winners find solutions!

A new system my assets...There is not a system needed for the mistakes this team makes in effort and determination and simple basketball 101
execution each night!

No system is needed to stay on your man not not double a guy in the post and leave a hot shooter open like Mo and Redd do all the time!

You don't need a system to use timeouts properly, hit free throws, and rotate your players, close out games, share the ball every trip down and get back on defense!

That is simple basketball! You teach that in college to kids! Enough of all these EXCUSES!

Excuses and sometimes even reasons legetimat or misplaced gets your ass FIRED!

Wins and losses are all that matters, and that is the bottom line! This team should have been better then this and it is not!

Period!

Bucks_Revenge wrote:READ THE SIG

That is utter bullsnap. I look at other teams and they made changes and they are winning.

If Riley had not got rid of Posey, Payton, Jones and Walker the Heat would be a contender still.

It does no matter how many new players you bring in each year, they have to be the right ones that fit what you are tryin to do!

In fact, the Bucks could have kept the same guys around if they wanted to. There is not that many new guys here that you can say they had to start over.

You should have brought back Ersan, and Patterson, and Noel and gone on and developed them!

The system does not work because they got the wrong players for it!

The fact that LK is unable to reign in Redd/Mo at the end of games is going to spell his defeat. This was what as promised and it is not what we're getting.

I like the guy and I'll feel bad for him when he's fired, but he really is in over his head.

NotYoAvgNBAFan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

That is utter bullsnap. I look at other teams and they made changes and they are winning.

If Riley had not got rid of Posey, Payton, Jones and Walker the Heat would be a contender still.

It does no matter how many new players you bring in each year, they have to be the right ones that fit what you are tryin to do!

In fact, the Bucks could have kept the same guys around if they wanted to. There is not that many new guys here that you can say they had to start over.

You should have brought back Ersan, and Patterson, and Noel and gone on and developed them!

The system does not work because they got the wrong players for it!

uh other teams doesn't change 7 players on there roster after every single season. ....they change 1 or 2 players in there key rotaions....its different if you get a number of new players each year if they are not going to be a key member of the rotation...most good teams dont change there key players every season....

we have not had the same starting for 2 consecutive seasons since the Big 3 era.....remember it took the Big 3 a couple of seasons to really gel..how are we going to expect this team to gel if the GM keeps changing the roster.

In the BucksDead, er, BucksLive show after the Celtics game, my attention was diverted from the novel I'd been reading for a while to Coshun and Williams. They said the team didn't play with much energy, didn't really compete. Then Williams said they looked like guys who didn't enjoy playing together.

If management acknowledges that, there could be major changes coming. In fact, C & W agreed on building around Bogut and Yi, and doing whatever with the rest.

old skool wrote:I don't think that coaches have that much control in the NBA.

Look at the Scott Skiles failure. All of a sudden he couldn't coach, after years of success?

The NBA is a players league and the players set the tone. The players do what they want, more often than not.

oLd sKool

you've got it right... George Karl said the most difficult part of his job was juggling three egos. Big Dawg thought Ray was a prima donna, and GK had no idea how to get the big3 to get along.

Guaranteed contracts to 19 & 20 years olds don't give players much incentive other than playing for themselves.

[quote="ReddManBogieMan"][/quote]

If leadership involves calling out your players to the media, passing out index cards in a meeting to see if you are with him or "saying" if you don't play defense you won't play then he is a stronger leader than Stotts. I really feel sorry for all the injuries he has had this year, last year this team had no injuries at all..... NOT TRUE..... There is no rational way you can say LK has been a better coach than TS.

[quote="El Duderino"][/quote]



Well said!!