Could we get Monty?

[Eastoff]

Is there a way we could drop Nate and pick up Monty Williams as our coach?

 

[Mediocre Man]

Would we want a Nate disciple? I like Monty, but he, like Nate, likes to play at a snails pace. His offense seems very simplistic as well. I was a big fan of him replacing Nate until I saw his offense at work in NO. No thank you from me

 

[magnifier661]

We should head hunt assistant coaches from winning organizations

 

[Mediocre Man]

We should head hunt assistant coaches from winning organizations

Mike Budenholzer is the guy I would like the Blazers to hire. Followed closely by Bill Laimbeer.

And I still think Terry Porter could do a good job here. He did ok in Milwaukee with nothing to work with, and he was doing ok in Phoenix when they fired him. I'd also try to pry Hollins away from Memphis and take a look at Johnny Davis

 

[magnifier661]

Mike Budenholzer is the guy I would like the Blazers to hire. Followed closely by Bill Laimbeer

I worry about Laimbeer because he has 0 experience at the NBA level. I know he did well in the WNBA, but that's an entirely different ball game. Budenholzer would be nice though.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Mike Budenholzer is the guy I would like the Blazers to hire. Followed closely by Bill Laimbeer

Laimbeer was such a Blazer killer. I still remember Game 2 when he hit like 6 3's, but the Blazers still pulled off the win. Amazing game. Even if Laimbeer was the best coaching option, I don't know if I would want him coaching the Blazer. Of course, winning cures all, so if they hire him and he's successful, all will be forgiven in time.

 

[PapaG]

Mike Budenholzer is the guy I would like the Blazers to hire. Followed closely by Bill Laimbeer.

And I still think Terry Porter could do a good job here. He did ok in Milwaukee with nothing to work with, and he was doing ok in Phoenix when they fired him. I'd also try to pry Hollins away from Memphis and take a look at Johnny Davis

Oh Good God. Porter's teams play at a snail's pace as well. Nate finally has a Top 10 Pace team, and people are talking about bringing in Monty Williams (dead last in pace) or Terry Porter (managed to make the Phoenix Suns a boring team to watch).

 

[BBert]

I agree with both of mediocre man's posts.

I may need an intervention.

 

[KingSpeed]

Like MM said, why would we want a coach who studied under Nate?

 

[Mediocre Man]

Oh Good God. Porter's teams play at a snail's pace as well. Nate finally has a Top 10 Pace team, and people are talking about bringing in Monty Williams (dead last in pace) or Terry Porter (managed to make the Phoenix Suns a boring team to watch).

Porter's teams had a pace of 9th, 16th and 4th respectively. Not sure where you are getting the snails pace thing, but it doesn't appear to be the case?

 

[MickZagger]

Would we want a Nate disciple? I like Monty, but he, like Nate, likes to play at a snails pace. His offense seems very simplistic as well. I was a big fan of him replacing Nate until I saw his offense at work in NO. No thank you from me

The idea that just because a coach plays slow doesn't mean he's not a good coach. Its kind of silly actually. Popovich has won multiple championships being in bottom 5 in pace.

Its about innovation on offense and understanding how to use multiple options effectively. Ball movement, player movement. Screens and cutting.

I think you just have a hardon for the early 90's Blazer teams that you can't let go of.

 

[PapaG]

The idea that just because a coach plays slow doesn't mean he's not a good coach. Its kind of silly actually. Popovich has won multiple championships being in bottom 5 in pace.

Its about innovation on offense and understanding how to use multiple options effectively. Ball movement, player movement. Screens and cutting.

I think you just have a hardon for the early 90's Blazer teams that you can't let go of.

Popovich won 3 titles because he had a Top 15 player in NBA history, who happened to be a great low-post player, as his franchise player.

It's a players' league. The sooner people realize this, the easier it is to accept your team's reality.

 

[MickZagger]

Popovich won 3 titles because he had a Top 15 player in NBA history, who happened to be a great low-post player, as his franchise player.

It's a players' league. The sooner people realize this, the easier it is to accept your team's reality.

Duncan was a great player. But, I'm not sure what that has to do with my point. You don't need to have great pace to win in the NBA. Larry Brown won a title with a team that was in the bottom 5 in pace. The Celtics won a couple years ago being 19th in pace.

 

[RoyToy]

I think Pop has consistently used a system that fits his players' strengths rather than the other way around

 

[PapaG]

Duncan was a great player. But, I'm not sure what that has to do with my point. You don't need to have great pace to win in the NBA. Larry Brown won a title with a team that was in the bottom 5 in pace. The Celtics won a couple years ago being 19th in pace.

Perhaps you forgot about it, but even when the Blazers were winning 50 games under Nate, people were complaining about the style of play, and how boring it was as a fan to watch.

We've had some posters here who have spent the entire McMillan era complaining about him.

Anyhow, you're right in that Pace shouldn't matter, and I'll add that OFF EFF is a better measure of a team's offense than Pace. Unfortunately for the Nate Bashers, his teams have been very good at OFF EFF under his coaching, and that includes this season.

 

[MickZagger]

I think Pop has consistently used a system that fits his players' strengths rather than the other way around

The sign of a good coach. George Karl does the same thing.

 

[PapaG]

I think Pop has consistently used a system that fits his players' strengths rather than the other way around

He's had two of the best post players in history for the duration of his coaching career. He's never had to do really adjust at all.

The one year David Robinson was hurt, San Antonio was a terrible team, and they got Tim Duncan because of it.

 

[MickZagger]

Perhaps you forgot about it, but even when the Blazers were winning 50 games under Nate, people were complaining about the style of play, and how boring it was as a fan to watch.

We've had some posters here who have spent the entire McMillan era complaining about him.

Anyhow, you're right in that Pace shouldn't matter, and I'll add that OFF EFF is a better measure of a team's offense than Pace. Unfortunately for the Nate Bashers, his teams have been very good at OFF EFF under his coaching, and that includes this season.

I remember and I was one of the Nate supporters at the time. It wasn't until recently, about half way through this season that I've changed my opinion of Nate. His rotations, his inability to keep feeding the hot hand, the teams looks out of timeouts, the short leash he gives young guys, his half a season it took him to discover that Batum was the 2nd best player on the team and his inability to instill any kind of pick and roll defense has got to me. It took Roy having busted knees before we finally got to see what Aldridge was actually capable of. His complete gutting of his assistants and discovery that he needs to run with this personel is a sign that Nate knows his days are numbered unless he gets out of the 1st round.

 

[MickZagger]

He's had two of the best post players in history for the duration of his coaching career. He's never had to do really adjust at all.

The one year David Robinson was hurt, San Antonio was a terrible team, and they got Tim Duncan because of it.

His pace has gone up now that Duncan isn't the post player he once was. The past couple years his teams have been middle of the pack in pace.

 

[jlprk]

Who is the best English-speaking coach in Europe? Whitsitt made a great find in George Karl.

 

[MickZagger]

I can't find it anymore, but 82games.com used to have a stat of points out a of timeout.