Preview Sort Of Thing: Milwaukee Bucks

The Milwaukee Bucks and their new head coach Scott Skiles are an eclectic mix. Recent Skiles-free Bucks teams have been capable of repeated instances of spectacularly bad defense, whereas recent Skiles-led Bulls teams (last year excluded) have been one of the best defensive units in the NBA. Make no mistake about it - Scott Skiles can coach defense. He really can. He even made Michael Sweetney and Eddy Curry into decent defensive players, briefly.

In theory, therefore, a union of the two will bring the much needed defensive improvement to an offensively strong Milwaukee lineup. Or at least, that's one way to look at it. Alternatively, Milwaukee might have just hired a coach that them away from their strengths, further exposing the flaws in their personel. This could go either way.

For every Skiles strength, there is a big Skiles flaw. While he's shown that he can teach help defense to those players previously written off as futile, he also has an awful playbook. While he can coach guards onto better things, he can't coach big men, yet insists that he can. For every young player that thrives under his guidance, one more will be alienated and broken. For every amusing sarcastic comment he makes to the press, he'll make someone hate him. And for every glimpse of the remaining strip of hair across his head that he claims as a hairline......well, actually, there's no flaw to that, it's awesome.

Perhaps mercifully, the Bucks don't have too many young players. Their identity as a veteran team looking for something to push them back into contention was cemented this summer, when they dealt the closest thing that they had to a promising youngster - Yi Jianlian - as the primary piece for an in-his-prime Richard Jefferson. In free agency, the Bucks picked up Skiles's bitch, Malik Allen, as well as other veteran backups Tyronn Lue and Francisco Elson. Trading away Mo Williams saw the Bucks get little of use back on the court, but they did receive Adrian Griffin, Skiles's other bitch, and another old fart with no potential. These moves combined to send out a rather clear signal - they'd quite like to make the playoffs next year, please.

It's probably true to say that the core of Bucks players would be good enough to compete for the East if you significantly improved their defense. They have weapons, after all. Along with one of the league's best shooters in Michael Redd, the Bucks boast the vastly improved Andrew Bogut playing exclusively in the posts. They also now offer 20 point scoring small forward Richard Jefferson and 48 point scoring power forward Charlie Vllanueva, who both offer something of an inside/outside game. And while the point guard duo of Luke Ridnour and Ramon Sessions offer little outside shooting, they're willing and able to pass, which should help.

But it's not as easy as just adding a shit-hot defensive coach. Scott Skiles has clearly defined strengths, thereby seperating him from many NBA coaches (hello, Larry Krystowiak!), but he also has his flaws. Even in the early going, these flaws are showing through. The Sessions/Griffin/Fresh Prince/Allen/Elson lineup has already reared its ugly head on more than once occasion in preseason, and if you want to excuse its presence as being injury- or preseason-induced, then you need to start bracing yourself, because Scott Skiles is VERY willing and able to use Malik Allen as a go-to guy. You have been warned. (Note: this threat is doubly true, given that Allen represents the Bucks' best pick and pop option. Pick and pops are about the limit of Skiles's playbook creativity. Expect Andrew Bogut to be involved in dozens of them, irrespective of his complete lack of a jumpshot.)

That lineup represents the Bucks' closest replication of what Scott Skiles loves more than anything as a coach: players who don't make silly mistakes, talent be damned. If that unit - or any unit - can't get a shot off in 24 seconds, or even get the ball over halfcourt, then no matter, just as long as they rotate on defense and don't get all unnecessarily talented on his ass. This is why thinly veiled threats to start Allen (or Mbah A Moute) over Villanueva have already been made. Villanueva's talent level makes him a far better option at satrting power forward than any possible Bucks alternative, yet precisely because of the nature of his flaws, he may lose playing time. As a coaching philosophy, this mistake-free, defense-first-and-only style gets your players and your team to a certain level of production and success. And then it will keep you there.

Of course, I'm biased. I've watched all bar about seven games of Scott Skiles's tenure, and while I used to defend him vigorously, those days passed once his flaws became more evident. I've witnessed Kirk Hinrich become temporarily brilliant, and yet I've witnessed Tyson Chandler emerge into an elite rebounder and useful offensive presence....for someone else. I've seen Chris Duhon play 8000 minutes, and yet I've seen Thabo Sefolosha become damaged irrepairably. I've seen a Bulls roster overhauled, gain an identity, assume a certain style of play, overachieve, tune out their coach, and fall apart. And it's affected my bias somewhat. I refuse to apologise for this.

Scott Skiles is a coach, whose CV screams "short term improvements". He has been united with a previously mismanaged team, now primarily focused on finding "short term improvements". That team's weaknesses fit in perfectly with Skiles's strengths. The fit is so perfect that it shouldn't be allowed.

And yet, I'm not convinced. Because I've been there.


Short term future: They'll be better than under Krystkowiak, mainly due to the loss of Krystkowiak. Scott Skiles at least knows what he's doing, and half the team will benefit from it. The other half will be moved.
Long term future: See the above Bulls cycle. I'd like to be wrong.

God Bless America

All those who read my diary type thingy from last year's preseason game in London will notice how I have a little bit of problem with Five's marketing policy of the sport, which seems to want to solely appeal to the "hip hop" (which you can probably go ahead and change to "young black") market. Of the ten courtside interviews conducted that day (Brian Scalabrine excluded), all ten were of black celebrities, this coming immediately after an advertising campaign exclusively focused on the street demographic. (If that last sentence wasn't enough of a clue, I'm white. Bravo, top hole, jolly good chap, rather bracing, tea and scones, "I say Biggles, how awfully uncouth", et cetera. Basically I'm from a Battle Of Britain war film.)

Apparently my opinion fell on deaf ears, though. This may have been my faultWhy Five Suck for never actually voicing it to anyone other than your powerless selves, but still. I was right, and changes needed to be made.

They weren't.



Right now, our national team is making the headlines, and actually becoming significant on the world stage. With Luol Deng, Pops Mensah-Bonsu, Joel Freeland, Dan Clark, Nate Reinking and (hopefully) Ben Gordon in our team now, amongst others, we finally have a side worth knowing about in Europe, and we've recently qualified for the European Championships, after only recently being so bad of a basketball nation that we were ranked behind Chinese Taipei in the world rankings. In addition to this, the NBA apparently loves us and our swanky new arena, resulting in the rare but special sight of an annual proper NBA game played in this country. (Note to other countries out there: if you build a spectacularly pointless dome shaped building to "celebrate" the new Millennium, then after you flush millions of pounds down the shitter as it struggles to be financially viable for the one year of its existence, it eventually becomes worthwhile when you completely rebuild and re-design it into something entirely different to what it was before! FISCAL FINANCIAL PLANNING FTW!). For the first time since I've been alive, and for the first time perhaps ever, basketball has a modiocum of significance in this country.

And who do we get to bring the sport to the general public? Why, it's only the blackest fifty one year old white man in rural Lowestoft, Tim bloody Westwood.

Just not good enough, is it?.

Try a bit harder next time. Find someone who knows something about the game, rather than vapid "celebrity" interviews of people who pretend to love the game but only when doing so gets them free airtime. Try and blag some interviews with the NBA people on show, or even with some of the American press sent to cover the game. Fuck it, interview me. I scrub up all right in a tie, and I actually know proper English words and stuff about basketball and stuff. I also don't gesticulate with my hands like a crack addled twat, and pensioners love me. I look perhaps a bit too much like Andrew Bogut to be good TV material, but......Tim Westwood? Are you kidding me?

Can you see why we might not have the biggest fan base for the sport in this country?

I don't care what colour they are, but let's try and get some people who know of the sport that they supposedly "love". Maybe the broadcast could then be used to relay some interesting facts, snippets or insights into the game. And then maybe it could be used to inform and entertain the public. You know, like they did back in the olden days.

It's just a theory. Feel free to ignore it again.

Channing Frye's blog

Is worth visiting at least once.

I prayed to God for a miracle and what happened? Free internet in the PDX airport. The time blew by. I looked at all the funny videos from the letter-opening bunny to the daily condensed soup, which I recommend for everyone to watch — it’s hilarious.

I get on the plane sit in my nice comfortable 1st class seat and to my dismay the “bubble gut monster” arose his bubbly badness inside my stomach. What I mean is that I had to lay down a huge fart. If we were outside in the woods or maybe at an all-guys party I would have tore a hole in the universe but I had to hold it. Too many people too soon and I knew it was gonna smell.

Et cetera.

All I ask for from NBA players is a semblance of personality. It's a small ask, yet one often unfulfilled by people professionally trained to be dull and boring. A small bit of personality goes a long way, particularly if you aren't very good. If you're likeable as a person, then by proxy you're more likeable as a player. This theory worked on me for Paul Shirley, Scot Pollard, Mark Pope, Andrew Bogut, Rod Benson, Yao Ming, Jalen Rose, Rasheed Wallace, Jonny Gomes, and even Ron Artest. In my book, you gain invauable bonus points for just not being dull. (Let it be known, though, that you will also lose said points for all animal cruelty charges accrued. So that definitely counts against Ron.)

Similarly, if you're completely humourless, the chances are that I won't even try to enjoy watching you play. This is why I'm always quick to defoul Josh Smith, try to avoid Cavaliers games, and why the Derrick Rose era doesn't hearten me as much as it should. (Michael Beasley is entertaining, and he's good. Let it be known that I wanted him, while also remembering that my opinion on draftees ain't worth a damn thing.)

So every time I learn of an NBA player showing signs of a personality without a hint of remorse, I'm all for you. Well done, Mr Frye. Keep writing and not being Josh Smith.

(By the way, the above "personality = good" theory doesn't particularly apply to Gilbert Arenas. He's just interfering. Points gained for trying, points lost for being annoying.)

Me And Andrew Bogut Like Andrew Bogut

A while ago - about two years, to be inexact - I wrote this:

.......one of my most extreme pet hates is the hand slapping after a free throw. It seems to lead to nothing but awkwardness. What if the free throw shooter doesn't step forward, leaving himself agonizingly out of reach of the rebounder? They're then both left to slap air. Does one of them make the final push to close the gap? Or do they leave it as an air shot? And is that a good precedent when shooting a free throw? Also, when the players come in from behind and smack the shooter on the arse, he generally is not expecting it. This often leads to them instinctively flailing out behind them to try and return the gesture, again coming up with nothing but air. Who is this helping? Does it help the shooter to do this? Do they get the feeling that his team mates are not rooting for him, unless this mindless routine is adhered to? Makes no sense to me. I would outlaw this instantly.

And I stand by it. It is, truly, an extremely gay ritual. However, I decided against a fully fledged campaign against it, for fear of its abject pointlessness being used against me.

It does appear, though, as if I have at least one supporter - Milwaukee Bucks centre Andrew Bogut.

Andrew Bogut has never been one to fear alienating himself, after incidents in the past such as deeming the majority of NBA players as being obseesed with "bling" (for which he was right), and after growing a seriously weird pony tail (for which he was oh so wrong). And seemingly his alienating worked, for not one teammate tried to touch his hands or his arse after this made free throw versus Atlanta, which is normally an automatic gesture of affection, comaraderie and slight homosexuality after every free throw, made or missed.

So he improvised.



Despite implications to the contrary on his profile - one which needs rewriting, after Bogut's recent and totally unexpected improvements in his weak side shotblocking - I like Andrew Bogut. In a league devoid of personality, Bogut has the outlines of one. And even if it's an extremely self-confident personality with the tiniest hints of martyrdom, that is, nevertheless, a personality.

In a league full Of Josh Smith's, I welcome this.