Wednesday, October 24, 2007

A Shiny, Hair-Free Head May Have To Roll (Okay, It's Skiles)

Highly reactionary on my part, I know.

When I see "Skiles suggested his opening lineup Thursday will probably be the same one he uses in the Oct. 31 season opener at New Jersey" in the Daily Herald after a night when a second round pick started at center, pushing Ben Wallace out of position, I have to wonder if Scott Skiles is ever going to change. I have a homerrific theory that a young coach can develop just like a player, and flaws will eventually disappear like turnovers and fouls. My theory might be crap, just like Skiles' commitment to inefficient lineups, and the gritty players who inhabit them.

When Skiles took the coaching job in 2003-04 his frequent substitutions of a clearly gassed Eddy Curry, and ice cold Jamal Crawford were applaudable. They weren't winning games, and the Jannero Blount Johnson IIIs of the world weren't hurting anything. Kendall Gill even caught fire one night. There didn't seem to be a plan, or a true second unit. Skiles just brought out the hook and yanked players in and out regardless of the situation. Skiles has been doing the same thing since, but the players taking a seat on the pine are more talented, and I know what +/- is now. Skiles' days in Phoenix showed a similar inefficient offense, and way too many minutes given to inferior players. If Cliff Robinson ever has a charity named after him, Skiles is on the board of directors.

The coach should be the most insignificant factor in any sport, and one who appears to be holding a team back because he can't recognize what the best lineup is (it's easy) isn't doing his job right.


Blogger BenGo07 said...

You're right. It's obvious. If we started Hinrich-Gordon-Griffin-Deng-Wallace, this team would be 82-0.

Just kidding, I agree that according to the plus/minus, Thomas should obviously be the starter. That said, I was kinda shocked at how close the dreaded three-guard lineup was in +/- effectiveness to the Thomas lineup.

The other problem with starting Gray, of course, is that if he's in the lineup, you might as well go to him on the offensive end. (Because you're sure as hell not putting him in for his defense.) So much for trying to get our two best scorers off and running. The move might make sense if, say, Deng and Gordon are injured (as they have been in the preseason). But since by all accounts, they'll be back soon, why take early scoring chances away from them?

If you like what he does on the offensive end, then, fine, bring him in during the second quarter, which is when the notorious Lulls consistently occurred last year. He could be a nice change of pace guy who can possibly combat that tendency. But to have him start, and take away the offense's early focus on Deng and Gordon? This is the heighth of stupidity.

11:02 AM  
Blogger Hot Shit College Student said...

And I was being facetious with "it's easy". But waiting for the best lineup to get on the floor is beyond annoying and turning into a real problem. You're right, moving a veteran around for the sake of some ridiculous 'establishing the run' football strategy doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The play of Deng, Gordon, and Hinrich is ultimately going to decide the outcomes of games, but no one should be making it harder.

11:30 AM  
Anonymous Matt said...

"But waiting for the best lineup to get on the floor is beyond annoying. "

oh man, you aint kidding.

1:01 PM  
Anonymous Coach Skiles said...

"The coach should be the most insignificant factor in any sport."

Well, that's just silly.

I would hope Skiles or any coach would actually help the team. Pretty much any good team relies on the coach to be a motivator in addition to their strategy decisions. Sure Skiles throws out some bs lineups that are painful to watch, but do you really feel the Bulls as team that didn't go as far as it should have cause Skiles made bad coaching moves?

Skiles beings other stuff to the table, I bet Kirk and other guards enjoy being able to pick his ear on how to run an NBA offense.

But hell, maybe we can get the Lakers to include Phil in the Kobe deal.

4:31 PM  
Blogger Hot Shit College Student said...

poor phraseology on my part. How many wins is a coach worth? 1? Maybe 3 or 4? They're obviously necessary, but not nearly as important as the players. Skiles' presence shouldn't be felt so much in the form of Gray, Duhon, and to a certain extent Nocioni. Players like that have to come in, but Skiles has proven to be a poor manager of talent.

8:03 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home