Are you happy with Stotts so far?

[Eastoff]

I think this is a simple question. Yes, no, Other explanation.

 

[Eastoff]

Mods, could you move this to not OT, please!

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Mods, could you move this to not OT, please!

Noob

 

[Eastoff]

Noob

Thanks! XoXoXo

 

[HailBlazers]

Liking Stotts composure, and willingness to play the rookies.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

My approval of Stotts, at this time, is directly correlated with Lillard. I think without Lillard's performance we would not be where we are. While the positives of Stotts outweigh the negatives, the impact Lillard has had on the court has an impact on my overall perception of Stotts' performance.

 

[BBert]

Yes.

 

[Eastoff]

My approval of Stotts, at this time, is directly correlated with Lillard. I think without Lillard's performance we would not be where we are. While the positives of Stotts outweigh the negatives, the impact Lillard has had on the court has an impact on my overall perception of Stotts' performance.

I think that's a good point. A lot of our views on the coaches stems from the wins, and how the players due. If our team got stuck with crappy players, the coach can only do so much.

 

[oldguy]

Overall I'm pretty happy with how Stotts has done. I would like to see him get the team to buy into playing harder (and smarter) on defense, though.

Go Blazers

 

[Natebishop3]

He's an improvement over the other guy, so yes.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

I think that's a good point. A lot of our views on the coaches stems from the wins, and how the players due. If our team got stuck with crappy players, the coach can only do so much.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think I'd be dissatisfied with Stotts if Lillard were struggling and we were a .350 team. That's what I expected from this team this year. Not that we're winning in the sense of a contending team.... but winning cures all, as they say. And, since at this moment, we're exceeding expectations, above-.500, and we have a glimmer of hope for the future, it's hard to be dissatisfied. Stotts seems like a quality person and a quality coach, so it's pretty hard to give anything but approval to Stotts at the moment.

 

[mook]

Batum and Wes are both playing better under Stotts. Aldridge regressed some, and it's hard to say how much of that is Stotts asking him to play Dirk-Ball and how much is the offseason surgery. LMA seems to be doing better lately. Hard to see how Lillard would be any better under McMillan.

It's interesting, because Nate was always adjusting his lineup to compensate for the latest injury. Batum, Oden, Roy, Camby, Crash, Randolph--it just seemed like so much of his career in Portland was adapting on the fly when the planned starting lineup inevitably fell apart due to health problems. He was a good duct-tape coach, cobbling guys together to get the job done between injuries.

Stotts, in contrast, hasn't had to change lineups nearly as much. Only our worst starter (Matthews) has missed many games, and even that hasn't been too bad because Claver proved to do a lot of the defensive stuff Matthews did. And that starting lineup has been about as effective as any Nate ever coached.

If you want to criticize Stotts for anything, it's probably that he hasn't done much to develop his bench. To my eyes he hasn't had much to work with.

But I do feel like if Nate were coaching the team he could have got more out of that bench somehow, just like he got the most out of guys like Webster, Outlaw, Blake, Telfair, Rudy, Khryapa and Sergio. All those guys basically suck, but they all owe whatever money they made on future teams to what Nate was able to get out of them. Jarrett Jack has evolved into a much better player than he was in Portland, but it took 3 seasons away from the Blazers to do it. Nate's ability to extract the most out of very limited talent was his greatest gift. Of course, his inability to maximize much greater talents that didn't fit his plan (Randolph, Miller, Aldridge, Oden, Camby, Crash, Batum) was a pretty big weakness, though.

In the NBA, and in life, success comes much more from maximizing your strengths than it does in improving your weaknesses. So I'm happier with Stotts' ability to mold a very nice starting unit than I was with Nate's ability to get the most out of dregs. But ideally you don't have to choose and have a coach who can do both equally well.

 

[mgb]

Wow 21-0. Never seen a poll when everyone agreed.

 

[Nikolokolus]

With this roster? Yeah, I think he's done a remarkable job getting them to be this competitive. Other than that observation, I don't think there's much to learn from his first two months on the job. The real test will be what he's able to do when there's some actual expectations in a year or two.

 

[jlprk]

Imagine where we'd be without Hickson. Stotts is the lucky beneficiary of a free player whose PER is higher than Aldridge's. A scrappy PF is what McMillan plaintively howled for. It saddens me to think how close McMillan came to getting the one player his system so desperately needed.

 

[RoyToy]

Stotts has a very good starting lineup to work with

He's been OK I guess.

 

[HailBlazers]

Stotts has a very good starting lineup to work with

He's been OK I guess.

So are you the lone Other? Nice explanation

 

[BlazerCaravan]

So are you the lone Other? Nice explanation

No, <-=*PdX*=-> is. He probably chose it to troll.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Imagine where we'd be without Hickson. Stotts is the lucky beneficiary of a free player whose PER is higher than Aldridge's. A scrappy PF is what McMillan plaintively howled for. It saddens me to think how close McMillan came to getting the one player his system so desperately needed.

You're sad? How sad are you, on a scale of 1-100?

 

[jlprk]

My pillow is soaked because, uh, I cry for Nate.

 

[RoyToy]

So are you the lone Other? Nice explanation

I didn't vote

That said, I don't think Stotts has done anything miraculous with this group so far this season. Their record is about where it should be given the starting lineup he has.

We'll know if Stotts is worth anything once the Blazers have real expectations.

 

[blue9]

For now, yes. Still not sold that he's a guy who can coach a team to a championship - but he has a few years to get to that point.

 

[EGame]

As some others have said, yeah I'm happy with him as of now, but it is pretty hard to not be happy with someone when you didn't have any actual expectations as far as playoffs go. This was and probably still is a rebuilding process. The real challenge lies when we have actual expectations as guys get older and get more experience under there belt. It is all about how he coaches in the playoffs. But yes for now he has been fine and considering he has a horrible bench to work with, I think he is doing ok.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Wow. Impressive poll results for Stotts!

 

[tester551]

He's an improvement over the other guy, so yes.

I agree. Happy for the changes. Wish he would have more of an emphasis on getting better shots. There have been too many 3s jacked up early in the shot clock or when there is a wide open lane to the basket.

 

[santeesioux]

2 games above .500 in January? Yes.

 

[HailBlazers]

LMA and Damian Lillard are:

"I definitely think he is [an early Coach of the Year candidate] because of the way he handles our team," Lillard said. "What everybody expected from us, it wasn't this. I can remember when people were saying 'We don't expect much' and 'It's going to be a rough year,' and in my head, I believed in our team and he did, too. As long as we continue on the same road as we are now, I think it's definitely a possibility he could win the award."
....
"I would definitely say he should be Coach of the Year right now," Aldridge said. "I think he has taken a bunch of pieces and he's meshed them together to put us in position to win every night and to put us in position to be in the playoffs right now. So he definitely deserves to be recognized for what he's done."

http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/1/8...amarcus-aldridge-add-terry-stotts-to-coach-of

What playoff spot would the Blazers have to reach for him to be considered COY?

 

[blue9]

I think it's moot if GS stays ahead of us. But just the 8th seed should put Stotts in the conversation. If we somehow leapfrog GS then Stotts wins it - despite his shortcomings.

 

[mook]

15 different coaches mentioned in the ESPN COY prediction at the beginning of the season. http://espn.go.com/nba/preview2012/story/_/id/8517268/2012-13-nba-predictions-coach-year

Stotts not on the list.

Stotts is in a nice position to be one of the top candidates. Lillard exploding, Batum living up to potential, Aldridge getting healthy. Most importantly, though, I think Batum, Matthews and Aldridge are really opening up their game under the new system. McMillan drilled into them the discipline of grind ball and working hard on defense and working it through Aldridge in the post. Stotts is taking that framework and adding so many more offensive features.

The most interesting thing Larry Bird said in his autobiography was that nobody should remain coach for more than 3 years. I think there's a lot of truth to that (unless you happen to be Pop or Phil). Players need to hear something different to keep their game evolving, and they need to hear it from somebody different to keep their attention.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

LMA and Damian Lillard are:



http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/1/8...amarcus-aldridge-add-terry-stotts-to-coach-of

What playoff spot would the Blazers have to reach for him to be considered COY?

6th seed i think.