Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,150 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Personally i am sick of watching JC get benched. So what was the reason last night. When i watched last night, with my bottle of Aberlour (Tom how did you get the picture of my fav one), it was his total lack of defense. S. Jackson was just eating him up. Jackson scored 11 first quarter points on 5 of 6 shotting and JC was just no where to be seen. He just looked uninterested and not enjoying the game at all.

As i have posted before there is a line between riding someone and that player turning you off. And IMO JC is very close to that. He will be a restricted free agent this summer and last night it just looked like he can't wait for the season to be over so he can try to get out of chicago. I fear he may get his wish sooner than that. I think paxson will deal him for a more conventional SG to match with hinrich or SF and paxton will get a SG in the draft.

david
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
I kind of agree too.

You know, if we're going to lose to freaking Atlanta and we want to send a message, send it by putting those kids out there and making THEM lose to Atlanta.

Watching a washed up Pippen and Gill lose to them doesn't tell me much of anything.

And while I sympathize with the reasons for the benchings, and the reasons for stuff like benching ERob for two games after a generally pretty productive stretch of games, I'd like to see somewhat of a regular rotation that I thought had our most talented players in it in what I think is their best roles.

Without seeing that, it's hard to gauge where everyone is, except that they aren't very good. When I look at what ends up out there on the court, I have no idea what the hell is going on. I'd like to see a 5 game stretch where we committed to playing most everyone in a regular fashion and see what happens:

1- Hinrich 34 / Pip 14
2- Crawford 34 / Gill 14
3- ERob 28 / Dupree 12 / Pippen or Gill 8
4- Davis 24 / JYD 24
5- Curry 28 / Blount 12 / Davis 8

We don't have anything better to do, so I'd like to see how that operation runs. Personally, I don't think it's going to be a lot better than the CF we're running now, but at least it'd be the onus on Curry and Crawford to win or lose the game on the floor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
When all else fails the biggest stick a coach has when it comes to motivating players is minutes.

Skiles has employed that technique to Crawford on a number of occasions without results. Last night, as you said, giusd, it was about defense...again. Jackson was a player who barely found himself a gig last fall, and he ends up torching Crawford as though it was JC who was playing on a ten day contract.

Forget anything you hear from Crawford. This has become a test of wills between player and coach. Well, Crawford's going to lose that battle in more ways than one. He's lost playing time already and that doesn't seem to bother him. Well soon enough he may find out that no one's going to pay significant dollars to an uncoachable player.

You hear Crawford profess all this love and respect for his new coach. It's all a charade. He thinks he's altering the public perception people have of him as a confrontational, "my way or the highway" player when, in fact, his actions betray him as every bit as obstinate and selfish as ever.

It's becoming obvious that the Bulls are looking for the first reasonable opportunity to unload him. Taking on Shandon Anderson's contract would not be considered reasonable. But fans shouldn't expect to get much more than what Thomas offered up in trade recently. For all his BS, when push came to shove, Thomas equated Crawford's market value to Frank Williams, the 25th pick in the '02 draft. Anyone who thinks we'll get much more than that between now and 2/19 is in for some disappointment. Between now and the trade deadline Pax is going to have to decide whether to accept a mediocre trade proposal or ride out the season and cut his losses when Crawford becomes a RFA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,378 Posts
C Blizzy you are exactly right and for what it is worth I say let him go for whatever you can get(although not for that Knick deal) at the trading deadline and move on. I for one do not want see that kid in a Bulls uniform any longer than I have to. I have had enough of him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
C Blizzy,

I quit reading after the 1st paragraph because your fundamental point didn't matter if it were JC, Gill, Pippen or some Joe from the stands.

We were losing no matter who we put on the floor last night. That said, why would you was development time on individuals that are coming up for contracts (that being Crawford, Curry and whomever else is considered a long term piece) for someone who I consider a one and done individual like Pippen, Gill and Blount.

I would rather get absolutely ROLLED by the Hawks with the kids on the floor so we can make honest evaluations of them compared to only losing by 10 with Blount, Pippen sans game and Gill on the floor.

People complain all the time about Crawford, Curry and the other kids but the fact of the matter is we'll never know how good they are until they are in a different uni.

Look where it got us with Brand, Artest and Miller. But hey, Gill scored 17 points or whatever, right! YEAH!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,378 Posts
Retro we already know what we have is Jamal and Eddy and let me tell you it ain't good. They may move on to another team and the light clicks on for both of them but it won't happen here. The sooner they are gone the better for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
It's becoming obvious that the Bulls are looking for the first reasonable opportunity to unload him. Taking on Shandon Anderson's contract would not be considered reasonable. But fans shouldn't expect to get much more than what Thomas offered up in trade recently. For all his BS, when push came to shove, Thomas equated Crawford's market value to Frank Williams, the 25th pick in the '02 draft. Anyone who thinks we'll get much more than that between now and 2/19 is in for some disappointment. Between now and the trade deadline Pax is going to have to decide whether to accept a mediocre trade proposal or ride out the season and cut his losses when Crawford becomes a RFA.
I was just considering that possibility. Perhaps I'm living in fantasy-land, but I don't want to dump the guy if we don't get much of anything in return. But perhaps I completely overestimate his trade value.

Same with Curry. I'd admit that I've pretty much given up on him being anything for us, but the question is whether we can get anything of benefit for him.

We'll certainly get nothing when everyone knows we're shopping him. Look at Crawford last year- supposedly he and the #7 (and filler) was going to get us either Rashard Lewis and a couple lower picks or Antoine Walker. I don't see us getting either of those type of deals now. But at last year's trade deadline, we were getting offers of second round picks.

Of course, the real problem there is that with Crawford we won't be able to trade him this summer :|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
Mike,
Skiles gave you what you're asking for. He trotted the same starting lineup out there for something like 14 straight games. He tried to establish a rotation. He gave everyone an opportunity to produce. And after all that he even put Curry back into the starting lineup to see if that would motivate him.

It appears that he's tried every motivational ploy he can think of. And now you're suggesting that he establish another rotation and stick with it through thick and thin? You want him to drop accountability as a criteria for playing time just for the sake of rotation consistency? To me that's tantamount to letting the inmates run the asylum.

If you allow the slackers to get their minutes whether or not they perform, how do you think the real effort guys will feel? How does a coach draw any kind of effort from anyone under those circumstances?

We don't see what goes on with this team anywhere else but on the court during games. We have no idea what kinds of attitudes each player brings to practice, or how they conduct themselves during the day. Does Curry take care of himself while he's on the road or is he up all night playing Playstation and stuffing Twinkies down his throat? We don't know enough about the dynamics of each player to draw any conclusions beyond whether they're productive during a game or not. Simply put, we're passing judgement on Skiles without knowing all the facts. And that's patently unfair.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,324 Posts
It may be too late, but I think if you want to trade JC the first thing you have to do is state publicly that you will match any offer for him as an RFA.

Then teams can't just wait and sign him in the offseason. Make it clear you won't just let him walk, even if you probably would.

If Pax has been shopping him as much as the rumours suggest it may be hard to make that sound believable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
It's called embarrasment factor.

Look to Kobe if you want to know how motivating it is.
You're my man, Retro! I luv ya (don't take that the wrong way!).

What's more embarrassing, getting beat by 30 while you're on the floor or sitting on the bench while your scrubs fight their way back into games? I dare say the corporate sponsers, the guys who pay fairly big bucks to have their commercials run during games wouldn't be too thrilled with blowout after blowout since NOBODY would continue to watch those kinds of games.

And what about the paying customers who come faithfully to the UC? Given one or the other as their only two choices, what do you think they'd prefer: a 30 point blowout so guys like Curry and Crawford might learn a lesson, or a game that's at least competitive where you know that the guys on the court you're paying to watch play are trying their best to win?

Its a tough situation. But in pro sports where EVERYTHING costs money coaches are responsible for more than providing players with an education.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,802 Posts
Jc was guarding Stephen Jackson. Stephen Jackson first off is more of a small forward than a guard. Secondly Jackson is about 2-3 inches taller than Crawford and about 40lbs bigger. Also much stronger. Jamal did the best he could with the assignment but when Jackson gets hot he gets REAL hot. It's not like Jamal wasn't giving an effort but Jamal can't stop Stephen Jackson in the post! Come on! Now we're gonna rag on Jamal because he can't defend a guy that is much bigger and stronger than him? Kendall Gill didn't do much better than Jamal either.

As far as Skiles pulling the starters, I can understand him wanting to mix things up and turn it into more of a scrum, but there comes a point where you have to put your starters back in and get some offensive production. Hinrich managed to see the floor again even though he was having a horrible game. But you can justify keeping Jamal, our leading scorer, on the bench when the team desperatly needs offense? Doesn't make any sense to me. I think there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye. It seems that Skiles agenda is motivated by factors we can only speculate on. But what he did last night certainly didn't give the team the best chance to win IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
C Blizzy,

I quit reading after the 1st paragraph because your fundamental point didn't matter if it were JC, Gill, Pippen or some Joe from the stands.

We were losing no matter who we put on the floor last night. That said, why would you was development time on individuals that are coming up for contracts (that being Crawford, Curry and whomever else is considered a long term piece) for someone who I consider a one and done individual like Pippen, Gill and Blount.

I would rather get absolutely ROLLED by the Hawks with the kids on the floor so we can make honest evaluations of them compared to only losing by 10 with Blount, Pippen sans game and Gill on the floor.

People complain all the time about Crawford, Curry and the other kids but the fact of the matter is we'll never know how good they are until they are in a different uni.

Look where it got us with Brand, Artest and Miller. But hey, Gill scored 17 points or whatever, right! YEAH!
Plays the players who perform. Crawford shouldn't play until he can help the "team" on D. What about the integrity of the team/game..coach wants to win and can't with half-assed D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Originally posted by <b>lorgg</b>!


Plays the players who perform. Crawford shouldn't play until he can help the "team" on D. What about the integrity of the team/game..coach wants to win and can't with half-assed D.
It would take Blount, Pippen and Gill playing 100% perfect, turnover free basketball to win a game on any night. They just don't have the talent level.
 

·
Our Sentence Is Up
Joined
·
40,250 Posts
At least we know that Kendall Gill kid is a keeper. Hopefully Pax will lock him up long term. I want to see how his career progresses.:D

I also think we're doing a poor job of developing Rick Brunson. I just don't understand Skiles' reluctance to play this kid? He's the anti-Jamal Crawford. You'll never see Rick come down and shoot a circus shot. Never see Rick cross someone over. He's all about the fundementals. Hell, Rick is a poor man's Scott Skiles.

More minutes for Rick Brunson, says I. He should be our starting 2.:yes:

And where is the Rick Brunson fan club? I should be a member.

**** Chris Jefferies.:upset:
 

·
Rollin Wit Da Homies
Joined
·
5,080 Posts
"I thought we were flat most of the first half until we went to some of the second-unit guys,'' Chicago coach Scott Skiles said. "It was a shocking contrast to how the initial group was playing.''

Eddie Robinson: 17 points, 3 reb, 2 steals and a block.

Kendall Gill: 17 points, 1 reb, 4 asst, 1 steal.

Ronald Dupree: 7 points, 4 reb, 1 asst in 19 min.

Some guys just want it more, I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,378 Posts
How long before Skiles goes with a Hinrich/Gill/Dupree/JYD/Davis starting lineup to try and inspire the team to bring more effort.
 

·
Our Sentence Is Up
Joined
·
40,250 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
"I thought we were flat most of the first half until we went to some of the second-unit guys,'' Chicago coach Scott Skiles said. "It was a shocking contrast to how the initial group was playing.''

Eddie Robinson: 17 points, 3 reb, 2 steals and a block.

Kendall Gill: 17 points, 1 reb, 4 asst, 1 steal.

Ronald Dupree: 7 points, 4 reb, 1 asst in 19 min.

Some guys just want it more, I guess.
He probably rode those guys a little too hard in the second half though. He should have brought Jamal back in with Kirk to give us some freshness with the offense. Seems like we ran out of gas at the end.

Another coaching mistake in my book.
As a coach you need to play the guys that deserve to be out there, but you also always have to keep in mind what gives you the best chance to win. And sometimes I don't think Skiles puts the best guys out there for us to succeed in certain situations.

It's not just a matter of playing Jamal or Eddy either. Watching the Knicks game, where Skiles stuck with the smaller Dupree when KVH caught fire when it would have been wiser to go with JYD at that point or even Eddie Robinson, a guy with length to both KVH's shot, similiar to how Crawford was able to cool Houston in the 3rd quarter just by being a taller defender than who we had on him when he was on fire.

I compare it to Phil Jackson who seems to have an innate sense of when to put a guy in and when to take him out...I don't think SKiles has that sense. He's a little slow in making adjustments still. Hopefully he can get better at it.
 

·
Our Sentence Is Up
Joined
·
40,250 Posts
Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
How long before Skiles goes with a Hinrich/Gill/Dupree/JYD/Davis starting lineup to try and inspire the team to bring more effort.
We already know that that doesn't inspire anyone on the team. Curry and Crawford are who you're benching. And they've both been benched so many times it's not going to have much of an effect with them.

I'd rather just see Curry get thrown out there for the whole game. That will get him into shape fast.

Why not make our young guys accountable for the losses in a more real way?

I know Jamal and Eddy both hate to lose, but when you bench them and still lose, that allows them to think that it's your fault as the coach for not playing them and giving the team a chance to win. Whereas if you play them the whole game and let them get skunked by Atlanta, then the loss carries much more weight. And it's for all to see.
 
1 - 20 of 70 Posts
Top