It's Official: Skiles is new Bucks Coach: 4:00 PM PressCon.

[Nebula1]

Ramon Sessions rules.

[Newz]

Ramon Sessions rules.

[xTitan]

-= original quote snipped =-



I have to disagree. Bogut to take that next step has to: Develop a jump shot, work on his FT's, have post moves beyond a flip, holding position posting up, and not disappear against great defenders

None of those things are related to Mo/Redd. DB made a post a month ago about Bogut playing with Mo, Bogut was playing substantially better.

The only thing that will help Bogut is that he wouldn't have anymore excuses.

I am actually glad that you think so much of Bogut that he should be able to beat these great defenders that you speak of, but if he were to beat these great defenders he would have to be elite himself...hmmmm. Bogut does need to find his jumpshot...it appears alot of his shooting is confidence and the second half of last year it was easy to see his confidence growing...he is actually the last player I am worried about because you can see his work ethic, improved game, and most of all how he has really transformed his body with core training..he is NOT going to be dwight Howard with that quick twitch explosion, he will keep improving the jump hook and up and under moves...but us poor white boys don't have that explosion.......Sessions and Bogut started out slow, but by the end showed big signs of improvement....Sessions has barely scraped the surface, and still looked better than Conley and Law.

[paulpressey25]

Sessions has barely scraped the surface, and still looked better than Conley and Law.

That is somewhat mind boggling. And a positive development since I think we could now sign Duhon and at least be "ok" for a year at PG and put our trade assets and pick towards shoring up other areas.

[pasting_monkeys]

Just found this, don't know if it's been posted already.

Dick Versace and Steve Smith have a chat about the 'Skiles effect'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSUi2juj7kU

[Kerb Hohl]

Who is this "star player" that Steve Smith keeps talking about?

[bigkurty]

Does anyone remember where someone posted a link or stats about Skiles affect on defense? I checked the links for Kelly Dwyer and Ty but that is not what I am looking for. I am trying to find where it talked about overall defensive rankings for phoenix before and after and he coached there and before and after he coached at Chicago.

[bigkurty]

Does anyone remember where someone posted a link or stats about Skiles affect on defense? I checked the links for Kelly Dwyer and Ty but that is not what I am looking for. I am trying to find where it talked about overall defensive rankings for phoenix before and after and he coached there and before and after he coached at Chicago.

NM, I remembered right when I pressed submit that it was from Ty but from a different post of his.

This is what I was looking for BTW
http://bucksdiary.blogspot.com/2008/04/ ... rnout.html

[Epicurus]

I mentioned this before, but it may deserve repetition. While as shown on the link you mention, Skiles' first year (after Ainge left in game 20) the Suns defense improved from 19th to 3rd. On the other hand, the offense dropped from 3rd to 16th. In 2001 when the defense reached number 1, the offense fell further to 22nd. The same type of high rated defense and low rated offense is found in his tenure in Chicago.

I have only some partial information, but for it, the above is not abnormal. Focus on one half of the court produces improvement on that half, but a reduction in the other half. To get to 50 wins, it seems to me that your combined rating (offense ranking +defensive ranking) can't get below 22 or 23. The Bucks this year had a 52 (30 defense and 22 offense). Say the Bucks under Skiles follow his best defensive rank change (16 ranks), then the Bucks are down to 36. 50 wins would need about a 13 rank gain in offense. Skiles' two stops don't show that history on offense. Then again maybe the team will make an even greater gain defensively than his teams' past best or maybe the Bucks' offense can mesh more like '07 (last year was an offensive aberration)

[craig]

epi, those are some good points. I especially agree with your point: "Focus on one half of the court produces improvement on that half, but a reduction in the other half."

This seems natural in players of somewhat limited energy and somewhat limited ability to sustain focus. If I'm giving 100% on defense, maybe at times I do my "relaxing" on offense. And vice versa. Not many guys like Michael Jordan who have the physical ability and mental intensity to stay both energized and highly focused and also energized on both sides. Certainly don't seem to be many cats like that on the Bucks. (There are some "energy" guys like Gadz, but his energy doesn't much relate to effectiveness...)

So reason one is likely the players themselves refocusing, even if it's the same players playing.

Reason two is practice. You have only so much practice time. If the focus is on defense, probably the practice time reflects that. A reduced amount of practice time spent on offense might naturally result in reduced efficiency.

Reason three, and perhaps the larger reason, is that a change in focus results in a change of personnel usage. Take CV out and replace him with Ruffin, the defense will improve but the offense degrades. Pick your poison. Take Redd out and replace him with Charlie Bell. Defensive score goes up, offensive efficiency goes down. The overall efficiency of the team?

Reason four, change in focus, change in culture results in change of available personnel on the roster. Trade Mo for a late 1st round pick and a garbage expiring contract? Defense might improve, again the offense likely won't.

Will be hard for the total quality to improve tons. Hopefully young guys getting better will help. Hopefully Skiles and staff will do a better job of using the talent they have, scheme-wise, covering for weaknesses, maximizing strengths, etc.. Hopefully Skiles' intensity will result in increased intensity on both ends, so that it isn't totally a case of just robbing offense to pay the defense. Hopefully Hammond will be able to make some fair-talent trades that help, just because the equal talent returned fits better. And hopefully some new player(s) will help. (The high draft choice perhaps, plus I view Sessions as essentially a "new" player given how little he was involved last year.)

[Nebula1]

I mentioned this before, but it may deserve repetition. While as shown on the link you mention, Skiles' first year (after Ainge left in game 20) the Suns defense improved from 19th to 3rd. On the other hand, the offense dropped from 3rd to 16th. In 2001 when the defense reached number 1, the offense fell further to 22nd. The same type of high rated defense and low rated offense is found in his tenure in Chicago.

I have only some partial information, but for it, the above is not abnormal. Focus on one half of the court produces improvement on that half, but a reduction in the other half. To get to 50 wins, it seems to me that your combined rating (offense ranking +defensive ranking) can't get below 22 or 23. The Bucks this year had a 52 (30 defense and 22 offense). Say the Bucks under Skiles follow his best defensive rank change (16 ranks), then the Bucks are down to 36. 50 wins would need about a 13 rank gain in offense. Skiles' two stops don't show that history on offense. Then again maybe the team will make an even greater gain defensively than his teams' past best or maybe the Bucks' offense can mesh more like '07 (last year was an offensive aberration)

I think that's a great post.

[europa]

Focus on one half of the court produces improvement on that half, but a reduction in the other half.

I'm willing to take some steps back offensively if it means greater results defensively. If you're a strong defensive team, your margin for error increases because you are not likely to be battling huge deficits. Whereas if your defense stinks, you often find yourself in a huge hole that even the greatest of offenses can't recover from. This would sum up the Bucks of the past two seasons rather well in my opinion.

So if the offense has to suffer initially while the defense improves so be it. Make strong improvements on the defensive end and then you can start addressing your offensive shortcomings. I'd rather watch a team that's in every game due to strong defense than one that can't win even if it has a good offense because it's defense is deplorable. I've seen enough of that the past two seasons to last me quite awhile.

[Epicurus]

I don't disagree per se, just that for 50 wins or more, a team needs to get around a 22-23 cumulative ranking. I doubt beyond a total change of personnel if one could do solely the ranking improvement on defense. I doubt if the offense will get worse than last season, no matter the focus; but doubt if it will improve with greater defensive focus or more defensive personnel. Not you, but some seem to think you can win only with defense and my belief is that even if you are number 1 in defense, but no better than 24 or 25 in offense, then you will not see 50 wins.