Milwaukee Bucks Roundtable: Reacting to Jason Kidd’s firing, what’s next

Do you think it was the right decision to install Prunty until the end of the season or would you have preferred to see the Bucks leave the door open to hire a permanent coach sooner than the summer?

Sewell: This is totally dependent on the talent available. If Fizdale (or any other high caliber coach) was keen on a place with the Bucks during this season, than yes it was a mistake to install Prunty.

However, if no candidate was available until seasons end, than yes I’m happy they waited. What would not be ideal however, is if they waited too long, found no proper candidates and settled on Prunty. While I like Prunty as an assistant, I don’t believe he’s up to the levels of being a head coach in the NBA.

After the disaster that was Jason Kidd, this franchise needs to nail the next coach. Being patient and thorough without settling on a mid level selection should be ownerships major priority on this front.

Riley: I actually like this move. It allows Joe Prunty a chance to show his head coaching mettle, which could be an audition for a full-time gig next season with Milwaukee, or elsewhere. It also gives Milwaukee time to conduct a more expansive search and run a lot of ideas by their star players, if they choose to do so.

Joe Prunty has been on NBA champion staffs twice, so giving him some time to implement his own personal thumbprint on the team is a relatively safe decision. In his prior interim spots, I’m sure there wasn’t much he could change, as Kidd’s absences were brief.

Henriksen: I like the idea of sticking with Prunty. He is going to be human ginger, cleansing Bucks fans’ pallets in preparation for the next tasty moves by the front office. It should be a great chance to observe the roster under a replacement-level head coach, isolating their strengths and weaknesses from Kidd’s coaching before determining the ideal permanent head coaching hire, or making any big trades.

Windisch: In a perfect world, the Bucks hire David Fizdale on a prove-it contract for the rest of the year and then go from there this summer. He’s far too established for that, though — Fiz deserves security. Prunty for the rest of the season is fine, he’s got championship experience and might even emerge as a real candidate in the summer.

Katti: Riding out the season with Joe Prunty was a good move, in my opinion, because it provides stability. The season is more than halfway completed, and completely changing the coaching staff would provide a lot of challenges for a team that has developed so much chemistry with one another.

If an outside coach was hired, the Bucks might have to lose more games than they should as they learn the new schemes. In addition to stability, it also allows Joe Prunty to show that he is a worthy candidate to have the interim title removed in the summer.

Ahlmann: Sticking with Prunty until the end of the year makes the most sense. As noted above he has an impressive coaching resume, knows this team better than anyone at the moment, and provides a stabilizing voice for the rest of the year.

That being said, picture Milwaukee like an extremely attractive individual getting out of a long term relationship. Why rush back in with the first person you meet without playing the field first? The Bucks will presumably have the most sought after job come summer time. Let the talent flock to you, conduct a thorough screening process, and see what comes of it.

Polglaze: I think letting Prunty finish the remainder of the season was the right call. Expecting a new coach to come in and install an entirely new system is probably not realistic. Not only would it be difficult to perform a search for the right coach, but it would put the players in a compromising season, expecting them to learn everything that comes with a new coach in the middle of an NBA schedule.

This also gives Prunty a chance to prove himself on a long-term basis while allowing the decision makers to evaluate the team with a coach the does not actively hurt them during games.

Polewski: It makes sense from an organization standpoint. Jason Kidd is a future Hall of Famer, an Olympic gold medalist, and had over 12,000 assists. He walks on basketball water. Firing Kidd was going to get scrutinized. The next head coach will be scrutinized.

The Bucks aren’t going to win a championship this year. Get Jabari back to fitness, let the players gel a bit, and see what happens. Prunty knows the system and will likely not alter the status quo markedly. In the offseason get a replacement when eyes on are baseball, World Cup. It makes sense.

Treske: Finally, #PlayoffPrunty will live up to its billing, LORDE willing. To give a serious answer, it was the right call in my book, no matter what. After all, it’s not like we’ve seen the Bucks install a plan to have someone assume a key position only to have them make a mess of that plan in a very drawn out way in the public eye (#TeamZanik, always and forever).

By handing over the reins to Prunty, the Bucks get a closer look at a potential permanent successor while not totally disrupting the team’s chemistry and overall feel with each other at the same time. How he does playing out the season remains to be seen, but this summer will provide a more natural point to insert a coach that both the front office and ownership are fully on board with at a position that could get plenty of looks from former and current coaches around the league (same goes for assistant coaches too).

McGee: Fizdale would have been the obvious reason to act now, but if the Bucks weren’t 100 percent sure that he’s the perfect guy for the job, they had no option but to wait.

Nothing is more important than getting this decision right as the implications of a hiring misstep now could be long-term and far reaching. Let’s just hope this summer’s extensive search process goes more smoothly — and possibly less publicly — than last year’s equivalent.