Thread Tools

Display Modes

**TomBoerwinkle#1** · 06-08-2005, 07:04 AM

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/imrem.asp?id=59067

Quote:

OK, let’s see what Scott Skiles really is made of now that the Bulls gave him one of the NBA’s most lucrative coaching contracts.

The deal makes sense, I guess. The Bulls wanted him. He wanted the Bulls. It figured to get done despite the alarms of the past couple of days.

Skiles’ agent said Monday on the Score that negotiations were over, and everybody took him seriously.

This was three weeks before the Bulls’ deadline to exercise a one-year option on Skiles, five months before their next scheduled gameæ…

And negotiations between the Bulls and Skiles were supposed to be over? All because a freakin’ agent said so? My goodness, when did anybody ever take an agent at his word before?

By the way, Skiles and Bulls chairman Reinsdorf talked Tuesday afternoon and a new deal was completed. So what’s the next widespread panic over in the media, a two-strike count on Derrek Lee?

Better we all should just wonder and worry about whether Skiles is the right guy long term for the Bulls after all.

It isn’t as if the guy doesn’t pose some uncertainties. He isn’t exactly Phil Jackson with nine NBA coaching championships. He isn’t exactly a guy with pristine relationships with players. He isn’t exactly the easiest person with whom to coexist.

And this notion that Skiles turned around the Bulls last season from 23 victories to 47? Those weren’t the same players from one season to the next.

General manager John Paxson gave Skiles the right roster mix — solid youngsters who played for demanding college coaches like Skiles, and journeymen in no position to cause problems.

That isn’t to diminish what Skiles did with them after a 0-9 start. I thought he should have been NBA coach of the year for taking the Bulls to the playoffs.

One quality season doesn’t normally earn a coach a long-term contract guaranteeing nearly $4 million per year, but that’s what Skiles will receive.

Now all he has to do is prove he can be as good a coach over the next four years as he was over the past six months.

Good Hope · 06-08-2005, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomBoerwinkle#1

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/imrem.asp?id=59067

TB#1, always stirring up trouble. Don't you know that it is Reinsdorf who has to prove himself!

Joking aside, I can really dig (yes, that word is going to make a comeback) where Imrem is coming from. There should be a healthy bit of scepticism regarding skiles, long term. I think Paxson displayed it. I think he let things play out the way he did because through the negotiations, messy as they were, he could get a feeling for how Skiles would deal with adversity, could he cowork with others, could he submit to authority when he had to. It was like a Presidential campaign in miniature. You run em through the grinder, and learn nothing useful except...can the guy take it and keep his chin up and eyes on the goal.

It was close, but Skiles did it. He took a good look at himself, at the situation that was unfolding, largely of his own making, and realized he'd better pull back and thank the lucky stars for the opportunity he had been given. And so, he swallowed his pride and took the contract.

I don't think Pax ever had doubts about Skiles' abilities. But I think he had doubts about Skiles' stability. And this was the test of worthiness. Apologies to all the sensitive types out there who like to agonize when a crow flies overhead, but it was, I believe, a necessary messiness to really get to the bottom of what Skiles was after, and who he really is.

I like Pax's style.

**Showtyme** · 06-08-2005, 07:43 AM

Quote:

General manager John Paxson gave Skiles the right roster mix — solid youngsters who played for demanding college coaches like Skiles, and journeymen in no position to cause problems.

That isn’t to diminish what Skiles did with them after a 0-9 start. I thought he should have been NBA coach of the year for taking the Bulls to the playoffs.

This is really well said. It's how I feel, on both extremes: Skiles had a roster suited for him, but he also did a lot with it.

**truebluefan** · 06-08-2005, 07:45 AM

good article TB#1!

and yes, that is the $64,000 question, will he be worth it? Is he the long term answer? Many of us, including myself thought he was here to shape the team up and then someone else come in and push them over the top. Can he do it?

We shall see.

Good Hope · 06-08-2005, 01:50 PM

TBF, now you're showing your age with that line: $64,000 wouldn't have been enough to tickle Glass' toes with!

I think you are right, and many more people aside from yourself really saw Skiles as a stopgap person. Even Kismet intimated as much. But Paxson has been pretty consistent in saying that he liked Skiles long term. In his interview with North, he reiterated it. And again, he talked about Jerry Sloan and the Jazz. That seems to be his ideal. He really likes the idea of matching players to a coach.

I'm surprised more people aren't addressing the issue in this article.

bullsville · 06-08-2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good Hope

TBF, now you're showing your age with that line: $64,000 wouldn't have been enough to tickle Glass' toes with!

I think you are right, and many more people aside from yourself really saw Skiles as a stopgap person. Even Kismet intimated as much. But Paxson has been pretty consistent in saying that he liked Skiles long term. In his interview with North, he reiterated it. And again, he talked about Jerry Sloan and the Jazz. That seems to be his ideal. He really likes the idea of matching players to a coach.

I'm surprised more people aren't addressing the issue in this article.

If "the issue in this article" is "Can Skiles be this good for 4 years", I don't think it's being addressed here because it isn't an "issue".

I think damn near 100% of all the posters here have a concern as to whether or not Skiles can make it through all 4 years of the contract- that's why so many people couldn't understand why Skiles was being so "greedy", he was getting a very fair offer considering his experience and past coaching history.

IMO, the people who were complaining were almost 100% JR haters before this situation came up, and will continue to be JR haters for a long, long, long time. I'm sure some of these same people will be ripping JR for giving Skiles so much money for so many years if the Bulls are 35-47 next season.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes