Did we hire Skiles too early?

steger_3434 · Post #1 » by **steger_3434** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:47 pm

With the recent dismissal of Johnson in Denver and the talks about D'Antoni getting the axe in PHO, did we hire a coach too early? Let's believe that Skiles was Hammonds first choice. Would he still be his first choice if the beforementioned two were available?

xTitan · Post #2 » by **xTitan** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:49 pm

Why Avery Johnson...his offense is terrible, would want NOTHING to do with him...I am happy with Skiles.

jerrod · Post #3 » by **jerrod** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:50 pm

xTitan wrote:Why Avery Johnson...his offense is terrible, would want NOTHING to do with him...I am happy with Skiles.

that's kind of ironic

Post #4 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:55 pm

The first thing we need is a new mix of players. That's Hammonds job. The second thing we need is a coach who will sit players on their ass who don't play the right way. Skiles fits the bill in that regard.

rilamann · Post #5 » by **rilamann** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:02 pm

I think Skiles is a better coach than Avery Johnson and I think D'antoni is better than Skiles.

But out of those 3 Skiles is by far the best fit for the Bucks.

fam3381 · Post #6 » by **fam3381** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:05 pm

The flip side is that if we had waited, then a guy like Skiles could have been a target for Dallas (Phoenix not so much given his past there) as well.

Phoenix and Dallas are both more attractive jobs than ours, so while their coaches are now available there's no certainty we'd end up with a more high-profile coach. I don't see D'Antoni coming here. I'm not sure Avery's any better than Skiles.

WEFFPIM · Post #7 » by **WEFFPIM** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:07 pm

Hindsight is 20/20

europa · Post #8 » by **europa** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:13 pm

I'm glad the Bucks hired a proven winner instead of waiting around and hoping they could land a proven winner only to get stuck with leftovers.

LUKE23 · Post #9 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:16 pm

Actually, it's even better that we went early now, otherwise we are competing with Phoenix, Dallas, New York, Charlotte and Chicago for coaches instead of just going against New York and Chicago.

Skiles is a perfect coach for the Bucks current situation.

old skool · Post #10 » by **old skool** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:16 pm

Shaquille O'Neal says "It's always the players. It's never the coach"

oLd sKool

BobbyLight · Post #11 » by **BobbyLight** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:16 pm

rilamann wrote:I think Skiles is a better coach than Avery Johnson and I think D'antoni is better than Skiles.

But out of those 3 Skiles is by far the best fit for the Bucks.

+1

D'Antoni wasn't going to help us on the defensive side. And it's been said a million times. This team needs its attitude to change. Scott Skiles is a proven attitude changer.

Simulack · Post #12 » by **Simulack** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:16 pm

I'm content with the guy we got.

It's hard to evaluate D'antoni and Avery Johnson because they were both fortunate enough to coach extremely talented teams and each had a player who was considered top 5ish in the NBA at some point during their coaching tenure. That's particularly true of Johnson; D'antoni at least has a bit more of a positive track record with his success in Europe.

Skiles is a safer fit as he has at least had a modicum of success in Chicago with the type/level of talent the Bucks are likely to have over the next few years. Baring extreme luck, we aren't going to land a Dirk or a Nash and we aren't going to have a stacked Phoenix/Dallas type roster. I don't mean to diminish the accomplishments of the other two but with Skiles we at least now he's capable of getting a roster of mid-level type talent to win.

If we also assume that the Pistons are going to be a model for the Bucks with Hammonds in charge, Skiles makes more sense.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #13 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:17 pm

europa wrote:I'm glad the Bucks hired a proven winner instead of waiting around and hoping they could land a proven winner only to get stuck with leftovers.

My sentiments exactly. I'm sick of the Bucks being leverage (Flip) for better jobs, while we get stuck with a turd.

bango_the_buck · Post #14 » by **bango_the_buck** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:23 pm

WEFFPIM wrote:Hindsight is 20/20

Apparently not...

Sigra · Post #15 » by **Sigra** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:34 pm

It is amazing how people think high of D'Antoni and bad of Terry Stotts. Can someone tell me what is the diference between D'Antoni and Stotts? Both guys would like their teams to run and gun. They would like to play small. They don't care about defense. D'Antoni had perfect players for that strategy. Nash at PG, Marion at PF and Amare at C. Stotts had Mo at PG, Skinner at PF and Bogut at C. You see the problem? Stotts didn't have run and gun team. D'Antoni did.

I am 99% sure that if you put Stotts in Suns they get same results last few years. If you put D'Antoni in Bucks we get same results. They are same.

icat2000 · Post #16 » by **icat2000** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:59 pm

NO. I thinking how fortunate Bucks have already sorted out there coaches. Soooo many other teams looking for coaches that Bucks could have gotten left with very limited options.

Post #17 » by **paulpressey25** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:21 pm

EastSideBucksFan wrote:-= My sentiments exactly. I'm sick of the Bucks being leverage (Flip) for better jobs, while we get stuck with a turd.

I approve of Skiles as well, since it would appear Carlisle was very close to taking the job but then felt these other jobs would open as teams got eliminated. So rather than deal with Rick's whims we went and got a winner and got things done.

BucksRuleAll22 · Post #18 » by **BucksRuleAll22** » Thu May 1, 2008 6:49 am

No, he was and still would be Hammonds first choice

Well if this is true then Hammond is gonna be one of the worst GMs to ever be in the NBA.

icat2000 · Post #19 » by **icat2000** » Thu May 1, 2008 6:57 am

BucksRuleAll22 wrote:
No, he was and still would be Hammonds first choice

Well if this is true then Hammond is gonna be one of the worst GMs to ever be in the NBA.

You seem to have a real bee in your bonnet over this. Not really sure where its all coming from. What is your rationale based on to come to this conclusion - because it doesn't match your personal view point???

pasting_monkeys · Post #20 » by **pasting_monkeys** » Thu May 1, 2008 6:58 am

BucksRuleAll22 wrote:
No, he was and still would be Hammonds first choice

Well if this is true then Hammond is gonna be one of the worst GMs to ever be in the NBA.

Skiles was Donnie Walsh's first choice too, so what does that make him?