ESPN: Krystkowiak 15-1 Odds To Be Fired

[bigzy]

-= original quote snipped =-



Stotts first year WAS NOT a 40 win talent team. There should have been 4 or 5 more wins if not more. You had TJ, Mo, Simmons, Redd, Bogut, Magloire, Joe Smith, Charlie Bell, and Toni Kukoc. That was a good team with depth.

Getting into conversations about a 40 win team versus a 44 win team on paper is just rediculous. I am afraid to ask how you made that conclusion, and if it was a 45 win team on paper why did LH break it up?? Mo and TJ were both very young, bogut a rookie and Redd still young. I would really appreciate your input on how you decide how many wins a team should get based on talent.

[bigzy]

Stotts first year had TJ/Mo/Redd/Simmons/Magloire/Smith/Bogut/Bell. And that is when Simmons and Magloire were still solid players. That should have been more than 40 wins.

OK, I am confused Mo and Redd are still here and older. Bogut was a rookie and has to be much better now than as a rookie. Yi is better than Joe Smith at that point would you not say? Bell is still here as is simmons and exactly how is that team a 45 win team??? Again, I repeat I don't know what a 5 win team on paper means as Dennis Green put it you are what you are. did I miss when that team actually performed at a 45 win level. This was not meant to be a defense of TS but rather to point out how silly it is for people to talk about how good a team is on paper.

[ProspecT]

Give me JVG, he'll bring a defensive minded attitude and he'll utilize our big men.

I agree, he'd improve the defense, and force Bogut to learn low post/low block play. This team needs a base knowledge of basketball before it can advance, a rookie coach does not provide this. Between the two Van Gundy brothers, they've worked with Ewing, Shaq, Yao, and D. Howard. One hired Ewing to train Yao, the other hired him to train Howard. They've got a grasp on the big man game.

[Epicurus]

Save your breathe, bigzy, some of these guys just can't respond to facts and reasons regarding this particular topic. I wonder why no other coach ever went to the playoffs with 4 starters who were not on the team the previous year? Magloire who was a waste in '05, Ford who had not played for 1.5 years, a rookie with a bad attitude, and a Comeback Player of the Year which meant he wasn't much before '05. Let us not forget the one real contributing vet at PF but who was injured most the year and the other vet who the next year could not pass the physical. Yea, Stotts had only 40 wins and a playoff spot with this Dream Team.

How in the world, indeed, does TS become a topic on this thread? Some just can't deal with the present, I guess.

[bigzy]

Save your breathe, bigzy, some of these guys just can't respond to facts and reasons regarding this particular topic. I wonder why no other coach ever went to the playoffs with 4 starters who were not on the team the previous year? Magloire who was a waste in '05, Ford who had not played for 1.5 years, a rookie with a bad attitude, and a Comeback Player of the Year which meant he wasn't much before '05. Let us not forget the one real contributing vet at PF but who was injured most the year and the other vet who the next year could not pass the physical. Yea, Stotts had only 40 wins and a playoff spot with this Dream Team.

How in the world, indeed, does TS become a topic on this thread? Some just can't deal with the present, I guess.

I am still confused about that on paper comment??? Now that I think about it, we had the best talent in the state on paper back in high school, why didn't we win the state?

[Epicurus]

Some of these guys have no idea what on paper means. All they can do is echo some talking head or another poster. On paper, indeed!

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-



did I miss when that team actually performed at a 45 win level.

I think you've forgotten Stotts' first team got off to a 17-11 start. That's a 50-win pace. People keep going on and on about how the team played in December of 2006 but I think that first 28 games was by far the best ball this team has played since Porter's first season. You had Ford back; Redd playing at an All-Star level; Simmons providing a solid No. 2 scorer behind Redd; Bogut and Magloire providing a strong 1-2 rebounding and physical punch inside and Mo was (in my opinion) the leading Sixth Man of the Year candidate off the bench.

Did that team win a lot of close games through sheer luck? One could argue that was the case as the close wins it got in those first 28 games were never really duplicated in the last 54. But there were more exciting wins in those 28 games than we've had in the season before or the two seasons since combined. I think that team should have won more than 40 games. You can quibble about how many more or whose fault it was, but that wasn't a 40-win team in my opinion. It was better than that.

[jokeboy86]

Larry Harris would have to go first before Larry K, otherwise Kohl is not going to fire a coach he just gave a 3 or 4 year deal. Kohl can't afford to just waste money like other franchises.