Fire Stotts Eventually

[e_blazer]

sorry, can't agree. Gobert is a two time DPOY who doesn't throw up useless shit around the rim. And Adebayo is better on both ends of the floor than Nurk, especially in his ability to go out on the perimeter and defend. he's a perfect C in small ball lineups and would be the front court passer Portland desperately needs

beside, 'healthy Nurkic' is as elusive as bigfoot

Adebayo is a talented guy, but he's too small to handle the big guys that you have to get through in the West. Rudy is a defensive monster, but he's pretty challenged offensively. Obviously, the health department has been Nurk's big issue the past two seasons. I'm really hoping that he can shake the rust off, stay healthy the rest of the season, and remind us what the Bosnian Beast can be for this franchise.

 

[pougie]

If the Celtics let Brad Stevens go this summer, I would imagine Portland is one of the most ideal situations for him considering our talent right? Unless NOP fires Stan, which I can see happening.

Does he go to Portland or New Orleans?

 

[wizenheimer]

Adebayo is a talented guy, but he's too small to handle the big guys that you have to get through in the West. .

Is this 1995?

What big western C's have monster paint games that consistently overpower other C's? Jokic plays high post and baseline. AD plays perimeter a lot and faces the basket. Gobert is more of a garbage-man around the rim like Kanter . The Clippers have Ibaka and Zubac. Phoenix has Ayton. Dallas has Porzyngis. Spurs have Poeltl

there guys are not Wilt or Moses or Hakeem. Bam would hold his own out west just like he has against Vucevic, Brook Lopez, Drummond, and Embiid. And of course, the other side of that coin is that those bigger slower bigs will have to go outside and contend with Bam's dribble-drive-kick game, which is very good and a reason he is averaging over 5 assists a game...that's more than CJ

besides all that I've had to endure 4 years of incessant optimism about Zach Collins. I've actually seen Zach get overpowered in the paint many times, certainly more than has been the case with Bam. Adebayo is 255 pounds with a sturdy base, and, he actually has a 2 inch wingspan advantage over Zach

I get that you just like Nurkic more, but Nurkic is undependable

 

[wizenheimer]

If the Celtics let Brad Stevens go this summer, I would imagine Portland is one of the most ideal situations for him considering our talent right? Unless NOP fires Stan, which I can see happening.

Does he go to Portland or New Orleans?

assuming Portland will fire Stotts?

I would guess, if Stotts is fired and odious Olshey is still the GM, David Vanterpool would be a heavy favorite to become the new coach

 

[Hoopguru]

If the Celtics let Brad Stevens go this summer, I would imagine Portland is one of the most ideal situations for him considering our talent right? Unless NOP fires Stan, which I can see happening.

Does he go to Portland or New Orleans?

I think he goes back to college, maybe NC?

 

[Hoopguru]

assuming Portland will fire Stotts?

I would guess, is Stotts is fired and odious Olshey is still the GM, David Vanterpool would be a heavy favorite to become the new coach

Wonder why he wasn't selected by Minnesota? I mean he's paid his dues and players like him, maybe thats the problems, the Minnie owner doesn't want someone chummy with players? I really dont know why he was passed over?

 

[blazerkor]

My question was what do you attribute our clutch time DEFENSE being top 10?

Seems odd to me its significantly better and I have a hard time giving that credit to Dame.

This might just sound like a Stotts hating statement but I credit the discrepancy between our clutch time defense and our defense in all other situations to be indicative of a lack of discipline. That just means we are able to lock in on the defensive end, even when the other team is giving it everything they've got but we just don't give effort like that the rest of the game.

Honestly it fits what I think about Stotts... the guy doesn't push his players hard enough or hold them accountable minute to minute. He's a great raw raw guy which probably means he gives a good pep talk in close games or the players decide on their own when and where they'll give their full effort. I think on this Stotts coached team the players decide a lot more things on their own than players do under other coaches around the league.

 

[Natebishop3]

This might just sound like a Stotts hating statement but I credit the discrepancy between our clutch time defense and our defense in all other situations to be indicative of a lack of discipline. That just means we are able to lock in on the defensive end, even when the other team is giving it everything they've got but we just don't give effort like that the rest of the game.

Honestly it fits what I think about Stotts... the guy doesn't push his players hard enough or hold them accountable minute to minute. He's a great raw raw guy which probably means he gives a good pep talk in close games or the players decide on their own when and where they'll give their full effort. I think on this Stotts coached team the players decide a lot more things on their own than players do under other coaches around the league.

Also he's less likely to play our bad defenders in clutch time. You're not going to see Simons out there, or Kanter, but you will see Dame/CJ/and maybe Melo. Let's say you have Dame/CJ/Norm/RoCo/Nurk. That's three good defenders and only two bad defenders. But if he trots out his crap lineup of CJ/Simons/DJJ/Melo/Kanter, that lineup gives up buckets like they work at KFC.

 

[blazerkor]

assuming Portland will fire Stotts?

I would guess, if Stotts is fired and odious Olshey is still the GM, David Vanterpool would be a heavy favorite to become the new coach

Nightmare scenario... not Vanterpool, just the idea that Stotts is the scapegoat. Olshey should be fired first and the new GM should decide what to do with Stotts which in all likelihood will be to fire him too but Olshey shouldn't be given the chance after nine seasons to identify Terry as the problem. If Terry has been the problem then it's Olshey's fault that he's been the problem for nine years. For the record I don't see a fall off, this season, in Stotts's performance. As they say, Stotts is going to Stotts.

 

[Natebishop3]

Nightmare scenario... not Vanterpool, just the idea that Stotts is the scapegoat. Olshey should be fired first and the new GM should decide what to do with Stotts which in all likelihood will be to fire him too but Olshey shouldn't be given the chance after nine seasons to identify Terry as the problem. If Terry has been the problem then it's Olshey's fault that he's been the problem for nine years. For the record I don't see a fall off, this season, in Stotts's performance. As they say, Stotts is going to Stotts.

I bet they're both here next season.

The only scenario that gets Stotts fired is if we get swept out of the first round and look absolutely horrible while doing it. Right now we would play the Clippers, so it's conceivable that we could get embarrassed. I actually would like our chances against Utah or Phoenix. The Lakers (if healthy) and the Clips would just smash us though. The refs wouldn't let us have a chance.

 

[tlongII]

I don’t know what you guys are talking about? Dame is the coach, not Stotts.

 

[kjironman1]

Is this tread still going on? I guess it will until Stotts leaves. Then the same poster will immediately start a new thread demanding the new coach be fired.

I think at first, like in the first 2-3 games it will be "This coach is sooooo much better". Won't take more than 5 games. It'll take a season but rest assured someone will start the hate.

 

[PCmor7]

Hyperbole is worse than Hitler.

 

[Tince]

This might just sound like a Stotts hating statement but I credit the discrepancy between our clutch time defense and our defense in all other situations to be indicative of a lack of discipline. That just means we are able to lock in on the defensive end, even when the other team is giving it everything they've got but we just don't give effort like that the rest of the game.

Honestly it fits what I think about Stotts... the guy doesn't push his players hard enough or hold them accountable minute to minute. He's a great raw raw guy which probably means he gives a good pep talk in close games or the players decide on their own when and where they'll give their full effort. I think on this Stotts coached team the players decide a lot more things on their own than players do under other coaches around the league.

In my experience of playing and coaching, you can't be an undisciplined team for 44 minutes then everyone decide they want to be disciplined when you feel it matters most. Even if it were true, you're saying our group (half of which are minus defenders) can rally and become an above average defensive team in the clutch because they want to. That would mean they're also out defending disciplined teams, with better defenders; just doesn't add up to me.

Not trying to sound rude, but nearly everything you said appears to be a narrative and isn't backed up by anything of substance.

 

[blazerkor]

I bet they're both here next season.

The only scenario that gets Stotts fired is if we get swept out of the first round and look absolutely horrible while doing it. Right now we would play the Clippers, so it's conceivable that we could get embarrassed. I actually would like our chances against Utah or Phoenix. The Lakers (if healthy) and the Clips would just smash us though. The refs wouldn't let us have a chance.

That might be true but it's bullshit. It's already unprecedented in the history of the league for a head coach to be retained for a ninth season having never won a game in the conference finals. Olshey has been let off of the hook for keeping Stotts for far too long and for not adapting when it's become painfully obvious that the Dame/CJ back court is less than the sum of its parts.

You might think that the Dame/CJ thing comes down to the way they've been coached but that falls on Olshey again for keeping Stotts. If the team doesn't win a game in the conference finals (which seems pretty damn close to an impossibility) both Neil and Terry should go and to make a statement but also to help it make sense to Dame, you fire Olshey first and then let the new GM fire Stotts.

I love Dame, he's my favorite player in the history of the game. I don't hero worship the guy like I did Clyde from the time I started following basketball until I was an adult which was after he was retired. That being said, if Dame is holding this franchise hostage then he's not the guy I think he is and regardless it's the team's job to go to Dame, tell him they gave things a chance his way and offer him to get on board with big changes that he won't like or choose to leave.

We could get great value for Dame, put him in a place where he wants to go. However, if I was the Blazers in that position I would do that for him but also tactfully make it known that Dame just wasn't on board with allowing the team to do what it needed to in order to achieve more success.

 

[blazerkor]

In my experience of playing and coaching, you can't be an undisciplined team for 44 minutes then everyone decide they want to be disciplined when you feel it matters most. Even if it were true, you're saying our group (half of which are minus defenders) can rally and become an above average defensive team in the clutch because they want to. That would mean they're also out defending disciplined teams, with better defenders; just doesn't add up to me.

Not trying to sound rude, but nearly everything you said appears to be a narrative and isn't backed up by anything of substance.

OK let's run through this logically... either we magically become a better defense in clutch time or the same guys play better than they do during the rest of the game. So we either have a team that is checked out the majority of the time despite Stotts' efforts (which mean's Stotts has lost the team) or we have a situation in which the players choose how much effort they give and when they do it (which means Stotts is asleep at the wheel). Personally I think it's the last scenario but it's definitely not magic. In your experience, how can this inconsistency not point towards a coaching issue? I'm not being rhetorical. Honestly what do you think the issue is?

 

[OneSport3]

OK let's run through this logically... either we magically become a better defense in clutch time or the same guys play better than they do during the rest of the game. So we either have a team that is checked out the majority of the time despite Stotts' efforts (which mean's Stotts has lost the team) or we have a situation in which the players choose how much effort they give and when they do it (which means Stotts is asleep at the wheel). Personally I think it's the last scenario but it's definitely not magic. In your experience, how can this inconsistency not point towards a coaching issue? I'm not being rhetorical. Honestly what do you think the issue is?

Stotts, himself, said from his own mouth, that holding players accountable on defense is just a “catchphrase.” What more evidence do you need for causation?

 

[TBpup]

Adebayo is a talented guy, but he's too small to handle the big guys that you have to get through in the West. Rudy is a defensive monster, but he's pretty challenged offensively. Obviously, the health department has been Nurk's big issue the past two seasons. I'm really hoping that he can shake the rust off, stay healthy the rest of the season, and remind us what the Bosnian Beast can be for this franchise.

We would all love to see the Bosnian Beast....but that persona really only existed for a short time after he came over from Denver. It has never really shown itself again except in the briefest of spurts.

 

[e_blazer]

We would all love to see the Bosnian Beast....but that persona really only existed for a short time after he came over from Denver. It has never really shown itself again except in the briefest of spurts.

I get what you're saying, but Nurk has been injured for so long that I don't think we know whether the beast is gone or simply dormant. Either Nurk unleashes the beast again or he doesn't. What you or I believe/hope he can/will do is pretty much irrelevant.

 

[e_blazer]

Stotts, himself, said from his own mouth, that holding players accountable on defense is just a “catchphrase.” What more evidence do you need for causation?

Well, I pretty much agree with Stotts so I guess I'm going to need more evidence. What does "holding players accountable" mean? Is he going to go all high school coach and make them run laps if they screw up a defensive rotation? Is he going to cut their playing time? I guess, if they guy isn't particularly important to the offense like Simons or Ellis, but Kanter, Melo, Dame, CJ? Yeah, he's not going to cut their minutes. Olshey did dump Trent and Hood to bring in another serious defender, so I think that sends the message that the team is serious about improving the defensive effort. I think guys accept that they need to get better and are working to do that. So, yeah, a reporter asking Stotts if he's going to hold players accountable is kind of a meaningless catchphrase.

 

[blazerkor]

I get what you're saying, but Nurk has been injured for so long that I don't think we know whether the beast is gone or simply dormant. Either Nurk unleashes the beast again or he doesn't. What you or I believe/hope he can/will do is pretty much irrelevant.

At this point in the season all of this talk is more irrelevant than usual and it's almost always completely irrelevant.

 

[e_blazer]

At this point in the season all of this talk is more irrelevant than usual and it's almost always completely irrelevant.

True. We could all save ourselves a lot of typing and just respond in gifs:

 

[Natebishop3]

True. We could all save ourselves a lot of typing and just respond in gifs:

 

[blazerkor]

True. We could all save ourselves a lot of typing and just respond in gifs:

 

[Tince]

OK let's run through this logically... either we magically become a better defense in clutch time or the same guys play better than they do during the rest of the game. So we either have a team that is checked out the majority of the time despite Stotts' efforts (which mean's Stotts has lost the team) or we have a situation in which the players choose how much effort they give and when they do it (which means Stotts is asleep at the wheel). Personally I think it's the last scenario but it's definitely not magic. In your experience, how can this inconsistency not point towards a coaching issue? I'm not being rhetorical. Honestly what do you think the issue is?

Your last question was my original question.

I'm open to idea that we're inconsistent due to poor schemes, but it would only make sense to me if those inconsistencies were spread out. If some times we are great in the clutch, other times we awful in the clutch, that I could point to poor scheme. But we haven't been awful late in close games, we're significantly better in the clutch than the rest of the game.

To say we're clutch on offense because of Dame is probably the simple and likely correct answer. The defense though I can't give Dame the credit to... the improvement gap is far too large for a minus defender to make up.

As you probably know, I'm almost always going to dismiss any assessment regarding effort, heart, passion, etc. because I think it's the reason people give when they can't figure out the real reason. I'm not convinced our defense effort is better at the end of the game, I think the results are better. I don't know the why. I do think players in general are going to be more locked in at the end of the game, but that's going to be true on both ends of the court. Our bad defense is going to be more locked in, but it will be against an opponent typically more locked in, running their best offensive action.

 

[Natebishop3]

Your last question was my original question.

I'm open to idea that we're inconsistent due to poor schemes, but it would only make sense to me if those inconsistencies were spread out. If some times we are great in the clutch, other times we awful in the clutch, that I could point to poor scheme. But we haven't been awful late in close games, we're significantly better in the clutch than the rest of the game.

To say we're clutch on offense because of Dame is probably the simple and likely correct answer. The defense though I can't give Dame the credit to... the improvement gap is far too large for a minus defender to make up.

As you probably know, I'm almost always going to dismiss any assessment regarding effort, heart, passion, etc. because I think it's the reason people give when they can't figure out the real reason. I'm not convinced our defense effort is better at the end of the game, I think the results are better. I don't know the why. I do think players in general are going to be more locked in at the end of the game, but that's going to be true on both ends of the court. Our bad defense is going to be more locked in, but it will be against an opponent typically more locked in, running their best offensive action.

So here's a question for you:

If the players aren't giving the effort on defense, who's fault is that? The coach? The players? A combination? The GM for not bringing in good defenders?

How does a guy like Thibs go to a team like NY and make them into a really good defensive team overnight? They had the 19th best opponents PPG last year, and this season they're #1. So what changed? I think their personnel was basically the same for the most part. Why are they so much better?

 

[e_blazer]

So here's a question for you:

If the players aren't giving the effort on defense, who's fault is that? The coach? The players? A combination? The GM for not bringing in good defenders?

How does a guy like Thibs go to a team like NY and make them into a really good defensive team overnight? They had the 19th best opponents PPG last year, and this season they're #1. So what changed? I think their personnel was basically the same for the most part. Why are they so much better?

Let me ask you a different question:

If the Blazers brought in a hardass like Thibs, who has been known to fail after players, particularly star players, tire of his drill sergeant ways, how long do you think it would be before implosion occurs?

 

[Natebishop3]

Let me ask you a different question:

If the Blazers brought in a hardass like Thibs, who has been known to fail after players, particularly star players, tire of his drill sergeant ways, how long do you think it would be before implosion occurs?

Let me answer your question with ANOTHER question:

If Thibs could turn us into one of the best offensive and defensive teams in the league and we won a title, would it be worth it?

This team is extremely gifted on offense. The defense is the missing piece. If Thibs could add that component, if only for a couple years, would it be worth it to see what we could do?

 

[Tince]

So here's a question for you:

If the players aren't giving the effort on defense, who's fault is that? The coach? The players? A combination? The GM for not bringing in good defenders?

How does a guy like Thibs go to a team like NY and make them into a really good defensive team overnight? They had the 19th best opponents PPG last year, and this season they're #1. So what changed? I think their personnel was basically the same for the most part. Why are they so much better?

In general, I've been pretty consistent that this is a players league and they are paid to be ultimately responisble. If a coach could consistently make a 20 spot ranking difference, they would be worth $50m a year, if not more (I would argue more).

I feel a team of bad defenders will never be on a good defensive team, regardless of scheme. It's up to the GM, to put a roster together with quality defenders, and then it's up to the coach to come up with a scheme to fit. So they all share responsibility. I'm not mad at Kanter for being bad a defense because he's never been a good defender, we knew that when we got him.

I haven't watched enough Knicks games from last year to this year to provide an educated opinion on their roster change, minute breakdown, scheme, etc. I have seen our defensive rating range 20 spots under the same scheme though.

 

[e_blazer]

Let me answer your question with ANOTHER question:

If Thibs could turn us into one of the best offensive and defensive teams in the league and we won a title, would it be worth it?

This team is extremely gifted on offense. The defense is the missing piece. If Thibs could add that component, if only for a couple years, would it be worth it to see what we could do?

Tough call. A title would be great. I guess it just depends on how big of a smoking crater it left behind. The Blazers played pretty good D under Nate McMillan, but it sure got ugly after the bloom faded.