Hammond & Skiles Conference Call - Today - Page 5

[Wise1]

Nicolas: With RJ gone, who deserves starting role. LRMAM deserves this maybe?

Skiles: We'll see. Let it play out. We have options. Luc is excellent defender at four spots on the floor. Delfino gives us options, spread the floor, good rebounder and can defend some. Joe still in the mix, he's improved a bit. Hakim can play some 3. You'd like as many shooters as you can, but they also have to defend their spot.

Tim: What attributes make a Scott Skiles PG? How does our current personnel meet that?

Skiles: #1 thing is the ability to create off the dribble and vision and poise to make plays for others and when it is your time to score. We are high on Brandon Jennings. Need guy who is creative and makes good decisions....Nash, Paul....may get 28 one night and 12 the next. That's what we want.

Remember this is what the coach is asking for the first time Jennings scores 25 and has only 5 or so assists. Jennings will need to score for this particular team. He'll also have to be good enough to make guys like Bogut, Redd, Ersan, and Alexander better. Qualities of a special point guard. He can give you whatever you need on any given night.

[old skool]

Awesome job by PP. He really caught the essence of questions and answers.

Hammond stressed that he did not want to resign CV and Ramon to contracts that would jeopardize their ability to sign Mbah a Moute and Jennings after their rookie deals. He said that, knowing the market, he expected to lose CV, but hoped to keep Sessions. He said that when Sessions kept looking for another offer instead of negotiating with the Bucks, the Bucks moved on and signed Warrick. He said that the Bucks signed Warrick instead of Sessions.

Not once did he blame the loss of CV or Sessions on the luxury tax.

sKiles said that he talks with JH every day and while Hammond is the boss, that Hammond does not make arbitrary moves.

oLd sKool

[raferfenix]

The 15ppg for Bogut caught my eye more than anything. Could this year be the year where he gets it on offense? He'll definitely have enough opportunities too, as we need the scoring horribly.

[LUKE23]

So we knew we weren't bringing CV back in Feb, but we didn't look to package him, and we chose Hakim Warrick over Ramon Sessions?

[paulpressey25]

For those that listened, I think I gave a very fair summary of the call. Trying to type word for word as best I could.

The only interesting impressions I took away were these:

a) They tried to deal CV at the deadline but couldn't. Knew he'd get a big offer. Was never in their plans. They wanted Ramon for cheap early in the summer but he wouldn't sign here so they spent the money on Warrick and moved on a long time ago.

b) Bogut has to step up and be a scorer this year. Otherwise he may not really be a core piece.

c) They think guys like Delfino and Warrick are assets because not only can they help the Bucks but also help other teams (i.e. they have trade value)

d) Still heard a lot of the usual crap about needing to wait to be a FA player in the summer of 2011.

[jerrod]

This is EXACTLY what I called for as well. No doubt about that coach Skiles.[/quote]


yes, "our underacheiving number 1 pick center should score more" is quite a limb to go out on

[RamonSessions]

Scott likes Ersan a lot, as opposed to the feedback on him we got back from the "ersalasova" uttering one... expects Bogut to step up. Sounds like he's definitely confident in Jennings as our starter... so are we looking at a hinted starting lineup of


Jennings - Redd - ? - Ilyasova - Bogut.

[Newz]

So we knew we weren't bringing CV back in Feb, but we didn't look to package him, and we chose Hakim Warrick over Ramon Sessions?

Agree with it or not I think he is really trying to stress the 'good contracts' thing, so he believes Warricks value vs. contract > Sessions value vs. contract and it seems like his primary goal is to find two or three players (he's hoping Jennings/Bogut) to build a team around.

[smooth 'lil balla]

So we knew we weren't bringing CV back in Feb, but we didn't look to package him, and we chose Hakim Warrick over Ramon Sessions?

I believe he said there was nothing of value being offered for him because teams knew they could just sign him. Skiles said it in so many words. That wanted to keep Sessions, but when he kept looking for more money, they moved on.

[LUKE23]

I really wish someone would have asked why he passed on Redd and RJ for expirings, since it basically would have sped up our rebuilding process by two full seasons. Especially if the throw-in with Redd was Sessions, a guy they let walk for nothing...oh wait...Warrick.

[Newz]

b) Bogut has to step up and be a scorer this year. Otherwise he may not really be a core piece.

I like this point of view, if it is the one they really have. If Bogut can step up and be a 15/11 type of guy, then he is someone who should be here for a long period of time...

If Jennings really steps up his game and shows flashes of being a franchise player while Bogut averages 11/10 or something along those lines, I would look to move Bogut in a package to get a legit 'star' player, much like the Celtics did using Al Jefferson to go after KG.

[smooth 'lil balla]

I really wish someone would have asked why he passed on Redd and RJ for expirings, since it basically would have sped up our rebuilding process by two full seasons. Especially if the throw-in with Redd was Sessions, a guy they let walk for nothing...oh wait...Warrick.

How many times do they have to answer that. They want to be good first, then worry about being great. You don't agree, that's fine, but they don't want to put an absolutely horrendous product on the floor to rebuild. Maybe that's how you'd do it, but they've made it clear that's not how they want to do it.

[Bernman]

Hammond: We want to make sure Jennings and LRMAM aren't our next CV and Sessions. That's why we need to get our financial house in order. So we can keep guys like that.

I lol'ed at that same ol' bulls*** excuse he's relaying to fans.

Also the spin that we couldn't get anything for CV and Ramon at the break because teams knew they could just sign them in the offseason. Really? Would those prospective teams then retroactively also receive their RFA rights/leverage and increased success in the '09 playoffs? Gimme a break.

Ramon wasn't free to make his own decision on where he wanted to play. We had full control over that.

The comment about needing to acquire assets at reasonable contracts like Carlos, when Ramon would have been an even better execution of that strategy.

Only positive aspects I can take away are the realizations that we need to build through the draft and employ a starting lineup that can space the floor w/ Ersan likely getting the nod (that probably changed after his performance in EuroBasket). Although the former is just talk as of right now.

[Ayt]

The issue with Warrick as an asset is that he's on a one year deal. If we signed him to potentially trade him, that will obviously happen this year.

Its very possible Hammond signed him specifically to look to trade him for a late 1st to a contender needing some bench at the deadline.

[old skool]

So we knew we weren't bringing CV back in Feb, but we didn't look to package him, and we chose Hakim Warrick over Ramon Sessions?

No.

1. The Bucks signed Warrick when Sessions decided not to try and return to the Bucks and did not want to negotiate a fair contract with the Bucks. Hammond said that the Bucks signed Warrick with the money that could have been used for Sessions ("we did not lose Sessions for nothing; we signed Warrick", is what he said) after Sessions stayed a free agent deep into the summer. Hammond referenced that Sessions did not sign any deal until September and that the Bucks had to make roster decisions.

2. sKiles said that the other teams are also run by intelligent people who know that they could get Villanueva over the summer without trading assets, so why should they offer anything in trade last year during the season? He clearly implied that the Bucks did not have any offer for CV.

oLd sKool

[LUKE23]

but they don't want to put an absolutely horrendous product on the floor to rebuild.

That could very well happen this year though, so I don't know where you're going with this.

[paulpressey25]

employ a starting lineup that can space the floor

Skiles tone was somewhat dismissive when he talked about a "big bruising PF". i.e. that those guys just aren't much use in today's game. Maybe this means these guys want to build an Orlando model.

[Bernman]

The issue with Warrick as an asset is that he's on a one year deal. If we signed him to potentially trade him, that will obviously happen this year.

Its very possible Hammond signed him specifically to look to trade him for a late 1st to a contender needing some bench at the deadline.

If that occurs, then he'd prove it was a fallacy he couldn't trade CV because he'd become a free agent in the offseason. CV is a bigger bench spark and he brought with him RFA rights, unlike Warrick.

[LUKE23]

I agree with Skiles on that and mentioned it in the Ersan thread. The PF position has become face up in today's NBA.

[old skool]

employ a starting lineup that can space the floor

Skiles tone was somewhat dismissive when he talked about a "big bruising PF". i.e. that those guys just aren't much use in today's game. Maybe this means these guys want to build an Orlando model.

sKiles said that you can't defend teams like Orlando with a big bruising PF. He said that the league is changing in that respect, so he might use different types of lineups against different teams.

He also said that we might see Detroit play Prince at PF, as an example of a difficult match-up for a prototypical PF.

oLd sKool