Bucks News, Trade Ideas, Transactions - Crowder Out 8 Weeks

[tydett]

I think the OKC coach is really good and is a keen offensive mind. But even he is taking several seasons to develop and I think he is much more of an innovator and thinker than Griffin.

Would like to talk about this because I think Daigneault is a phenomenal example of bringing a coach along - and how a good head coach develops. Daigneault was with the Thunder organization for several years as their G-league HC before becoming the org's HC - so he learned to do the organizational things on a smaller scale before getting the big job. Coaching for a major sports team is more than just knowing your Xs and Os, which Griffin is supposedly decent at. It's about massaging professional egos, communicating a vision, and getting buy-in from top to bottom. It's about evaluating weakness and working quickly to find new solutions. It's about knowing personal deficiencies and finding ways to compensate for them. It takes leadership, character, and interpersonal skills.

Daigneault then got to work with a young team to implement that system, and high character vets were brought in to support that implementation. Egos for players were managed because they weren't superstars, and I'd argue that Daigneault has that team performing far above expectations since taking over and he might be the brightest young coach in the league.

Griffin... does none of these things nor was he put into a situation where he could develop these attributes. Being a substitute teacher or an administrative assistant who has to "toe the line" but can ultimately distance themselves from the power above them is far different from being "the guy" who everyone looks to for solutions. It's why I was very happy with Stotts being hired - as a long time head coach, he could help Griffin develop these skills that turn a solid teacher (of which Griffin is allegedly) into a strong leader. Instead, Griffin's lack of experience - being charitable here - led him to chase off the guy who could probably best help him become a stronger head coach. His ability to massage egos is obviously off, when his response to someone doing something he disagrees with is to dress them down publicly, and the fact that he can't get players to stop their worst habits. This also reflects on his communication of his vision. There was a semblance of systems for about 6 minutes at the beginning of the last game, but it quickly dissolved with the first rotation. He's obviously struggling to get buy-in, based on the fact it took 3 games for players to tell him what they want (and for him to give up on his vision almost immediately). Griffin may have had a vision when he was hired, but he has abandoned it in favor of holding onto his job and his minimal influence over the team - surely he would need to be blind to not realize that the future is looking grim for him.

The Bucks needed to hire a strong organizational guy to take over for a strong organizational guy in Bud. Instead, they went with a man who is clearly out of his element, gave him only one avenue for improvement who he immediately ran off, and now have a rudderless ship with a feckless captain. Continuing to follow that captain's direction runs the risk of running the ship into a cliff from which it cannot easily recover. Gotta toss him overboard.

[KidA24]

I never minded "play random," because like Bud I believe basketball is essentially an improvisatory game. But the glaring weakness of our halfcourt offense last year argued for a change, and making that change will not come without pain and awkward failures, even with two Top-75 All-Time players on the court.

If and when the Bucks look like a team with a halfcourt offense that routinely produces good shots, all the other minor shortcomings we have seen in the first few games will recede into the background. Winning does that.

I'd argue that not being able to rebound, play transition defense or defense in general are not minor short comings.

[sidney lanier]

I never minded "play random," because like Bud I believe basketball is essentially an improvisatory game. But the glaring weakness of our halfcourt offense last year argued for a change, and making that change will not come without pain and awkward failures, even with two Top-75 All-Time players on the court.

If and when the Bucks look like a team with a halfcourt offense that routinely produces good shots, all the other minor shortcomings we have seen in the first few games will recede into the background. Winning does that.

I'd argue that not being able to rebound, play transition defense or defense in general are not minor short comings.

Not in the abstract, I agree. But when you're outrebounded or outscored in transition points or give up more steals than you get, and you still win the game, those things become of academic interest only.

[Prez]

I never minded "play random," because like Bud I believe basketball is essentially an improvisatory game. But the glaring weakness of our halfcourt offense last year argued for a change, and making that change will not come without pain and awkward failures, even with two Top-75 All-Time players on the court.

If and when the Bucks look like a team with a halfcourt offense that routinely produces good shots, all the other minor shortcomings we have seen in the first few games will recede into the background. Winning does that.

I'd argue that not being able to rebound, play transition defense or defense in general are not minor short comings.

Not in the abstract, I agree. But when you're outrebounded or outscored in transition points or give up more steals than you get, and you still win the game, those things become of academic interest only.

The problem is we’re not going to be winning games, or playoff series, against the elite teams with that profile as a team. Getting killed on the boards and defensively is getting us smacked against the likes of Boston/Denver when it matters.

[sidney lanier]

I'd argue that not being able to rebound, play transition defense or defense in general are not minor short comings.

Not in the abstract, I agree. But when you're outrebounded or outscored in transition points or give up more steals than you get, and you still win the game, those things become of academic interest only.

The problem is we’re not going to be winning games, or playoff series, against the elite teams with that profile as a team. Getting killed on the boards and defensively is getting us smacked against the likes of Boston/Denver when it matters.

That's certainly the conventional wisdom. However, it's easy to get lost when partializing the statistical profile of a game and assume that correlation equals causation. Here's an interesting representation of offensive rebounds vs. points.

[KidA24]

Not in the abstract, I agree. But when you're outrebounded or outscored in transition points or give up more steals than you get, and you still win the game, those things become of academic interest only.

The problem is we’re not going to be winning games, or playoff series, against the elite teams with that profile as a team. Getting killed on the boards and defensively is getting us smacked against the likes of Boston/Denver when it matters.

That's certainly the conventional wisdom. However, it's easy to get lost when partializing the statistical profile of a game and assume that correlation equals causation. Here's an interesting representation of offensive rebounds vs. points.

That's not based on rebounding rate, it looks like it is total rebounds, so an awful shooting team will have more opportunities and more OREBs.

If you are giving other great teams more possessions, and you aren't out scoring them by a GSW 2017 level margin, you're going to lose. Lose. And lose again.

[BroncoBuck]

Celtics game next week will be key. A good barometer.

As others have mentioned, tonight is a key game as well and will be very telling.

As for the Celtics, I know I’m beating a dead horse with this, but starting Beasley in a matchup against Tatum/Brown when you have two young athletic 6’7” defensive wings to throw at them would be legitimate coaching malpractice. The whole game will be very informative, but the starting lineup even before opening tip will be as well.

Griff has a built in excuse for tonight now that Giannis is out.

[sidney lanier]

The problem is we’re not going to be winning games, or playoff series, against the elite teams with that profile as a team. Getting killed on the boards and defensively is getting us smacked against the likes of Boston/Denver when it matters.

That's certainly the conventional wisdom. However, it's easy to get lost when partializing the statistical profile of a game and assume that correlation equals causation. Here's an interesting representation of offensive rebounds vs. points.

That's not based on rebounding rate, it looks like it is total rebounds, so an awful shooting team will have more opportunities and more OREBs.

If you are giving other great teams more possessions, and you aren't out scoring them by a GSW 2017 level margin, you're going to lose. Lose. And lose again.

Yes, total OREBs and total pts. Of course more misses means more OREB opportunities, bur remember your original premise: getting outrebounded is no small thing and, by extension, correlates with losses. The numbers don't ask for reasons. OREBs don't correlate with wins, or only very slightly (r squared = 0.002, or practically no r at all). DREBs do carry a meaningful correlation, though.

I remember the college football coach (it was one of the biggies like Bear Bryant, but I can't remember which one) who, when challenged with the fact that the losing team outgained his winning team, said, "Well, we can play that game, too."

Hello -- you play to win the game, and whether or not you lose a particular statistical category is a side note only. If the Bucks can get to a place where they attain a sufficiently reliable halfcourt offense such that it results in wins, not checking every box in the box score will be of only passing interest.

[theFireBlanket]

Celtics game next week will be key. A good barometer.

As others have mentioned, tonight is a key game as well and will be very telling.

As for the Celtics, I know I’m beating a dead horse with this, but starting Beasley in a matchup against Tatum/Brown when you have two young athletic 6’7” defensive wings to throw at them would be legitimate coaching malpractice. The whole game will be very informative, but the starting lineup even before opening tip will be as well.

Griff has a built in excuse for tonight now that Giannis is out.

Bud won the ECF without Giannis.

[pifhluk23]

Celtics game next week will be key. A good barometer.

As others have mentioned, tonight is a key game as well and will be very telling.

As for the Celtics, I know I’m beating a dead horse with this, but starting Beasley in a matchup against Tatum/Brown when you have two young athletic 6’7” defensive wings to throw at them would be legitimate coaching malpractice. The whole game will be very informative, but the starting lineup even before opening tip will be as well.

Griff has a built in excuse for tonight now that Giannis is out.

They likely won't have Anunoby and we are supposed to be the far superior team. No excuses.

[jimmybones]

Let's discuss this here

I think Horst needs to read this and make decisions now and not later.

https://www.brewhoop.com/platform/amp/2023/11/14/23958816/milwaukee-bucks-adrian-griffin-coaching-change

This is a great summation of the situation and also quite sobering.

Sadly, I don't think they will have the balls to fire him in the first half of season one. I can certainly understand the hesitation to do that - quite frankly they are going to look insane and unstable from a national perspective - at least in the short term.

My other fear with cutting ties now is that you'd almost certainly be putting yourself into an interim/lame duck situation and be right back in this place next offseason. Unless we win it all this year our pull a rabbit out of our ass and find a long term coach mid-season, we'd be looking at hiring our 4th head coach in the course of one calendar year. That has to limit the amount of potential suitors for the job.

With all that said, I'd fully support pulling the plug right now. I am just too alarmed by our schematic decisions, especially when paired with personnel, the effort and energy are poor as well. We have taken areas where we were elite to good in and gone to the exact opposite end of the rankings. Bottom line is I fear wasting a championship season more than I fear having egg on my face and looking dysfunctional in the short term.

[Ron Swanson]

Sorry, while I agree with a lot of the points and underlying message of that Brewhoop "article", that read more like some angry rant that you'd see on RealGMBucks-dot-com rather than anything resembling any sort of respectable piece of journalism. That those guys put their stamp on that kind of opinion piece is pretty disappointing. The whole "he interviewed a lot of times so that's a red flag" thing continues to be monumentally stupid, even if Griff indeed is a dope.

This part is less a statement of the facts and more editorializing and hypothesizing.

Yeah, indeed.

[PG Graveyard]

When did Brewhoop become a clown show?

[rayallenscalves]

I 100% agree with the article. It was a bad hire when it was made, it's become even more obvious through the first month, and I don't see it changing any time soon.

[jimmybones]

Sorry, while I agree with a lot of the points and underlying message of that Brewhoop "article", that read more like some angry rant that you'd see on RealGMBucks-dot-com rather than anything resembling any sort of respectable piece of journalism. That those guys put their stamp on that kind of opinion piece is pretty disappointing. The whole "he interviewed a lot of times so that's a red flag" thing continues to be monumentally stupid, even if Griff indeed is a dope.

This part is less a statement of the facts and more editorializing and hypothesizing.

Yeah, indeed.

How is it not a red flag that 14 other teams sat down with him, heard his pitch and passed? Did we really think we were seeing something that no one else saw? Or were we the only ones to fall for a grifters pitch and fail to see there was nothing behind it?

[Ron Swanson]

See: how many teams interviewed Darvin before he got the Lakers job (it was literally a third of the league). Darvin is a good coach. It means nothing.

[soxperry]

That's certainly the conventional wisdom. However, it's easy to get lost when partializing the statistical profile of a game and assume that correlation equals causation. Here's an interesting representation of offensive rebounds vs. points.

That's not based on rebounding rate, it looks like it is total rebounds, so an awful shooting team will have more opportunities and more OREBs.

If you are giving other great teams more possessions, and you aren't out scoring them by a GSW 2017 level margin, you're going to lose. Lose. And lose again.

Yes, total OREBs and total pts. Of course more misses means more OREB opportunities, bur remember your original premise: getting outrebounded is no small thing and, by extension, correlates with losses. The numbers don't ask for reasons. OREBs don't correlate with wins, or only very slightly (r squared = 0.002, or practically no r at all). DREBs do carry a meaningful correlation, though.

I remember the college football coach (it was one of the biggies like Bear Bryant, but I can't remember which one) who, when challenged with the fact that the losing team outgained his winning team, said, "Well, we can play that game, too."

Hello -- you play to win the game, and whether or not you lose a particular statistical category is a side note only. If the Bucks can get to a place where they attain a sufficiently reliable halfcourt offense such that it results in wins, not checking every box in the box score will be of only passing interest.

I believe you proved his point, no?

[Prez]

Some fun MarJon stuff:

Read on Twitter

Lot of good, some not as good, but all in all this is a dude we should absolutely be giving 23-25+ mpg every night and doing everything possible to mold him into a 16 game starting wing. Same goes for Dre obviously.

[GoldenAntlers]

Celtics game next week will be key. A good barometer.

Giannis and Dame will rest and we'll only play Khris 19 minutes.

[DingleJerry]

See: how many teams interviewed Darvin before he got the Lakers job (it was literally a third of the league). Darvin is a good coach. It means nothing.

There's likely also several people who got hired on their first interview or two yet ended up being trash coaches. Jason Kidd is probably one of them.

Wouldn't surprise me if there's a correlation to of some kind in there but I can't imagine its a very strong one.