Fire Stotts Eventually

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

How good do you think Terry Stotts is a s a coach?

  • Top 5

    Votes: 9 5.8%

  • Top 10

    Votes: 44 28.6%

  • Top 20

    Votes: 35 22.7%

  • Needs to go!

    Votes: 51 33.1%

  • He's the very best!

    Votes: 2 1.3%

  • Lets hope he continues to improve.

    Votes: 13 8.4%
  • Total voters
    154

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Instead of now, how about we fire Stotts tomorrow?
 
Well Stotts offense been the same the last 3 years. He is jump shooting type of coach. Its not hard to guard by other teams. When we are on for that night we look great, but this year we been on the 1st 2 games. Since then we are hot or cold on our shooting that why you see spurts throughout the game. You go to the bread butter when our shots not going is the pick and roll with Dame and Nurk. But when they are not in it can be CJ or Napier with Davis. But we settle with the jump shot even if it not going in. Last year when we got Nurk him and Dame pick n roll teams to death or Nurk in the low posts and players cutting to the basket and he was delivering. Nurk setting the high screen for Dame and CJ and they was coming off that and delivering. We been successful in 1st Qt this year majority of the game why because we playing off Nurk like when we got him at the end of the year. The rest of the game we go back to a jump shooting team and been unsuccessful doing it. Now who fault is that it little on the players and a lot on the coach. Why I said the coach because he has to demand to the players that they play like how they started the game. If they get off course you call
time out and put them back on course.
 
Chris Craig said:
When Nurk came last year and did such fantastic things, it wasn't because of Stotts system. It was in spite of it. Now that Stotts has had time to stuff Nurk into his system, he has stagnated Nurk.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with that. It's somewhat similar to what happened with Meyers. Remember the first year when he was a 50/40/90 guy but shot limited '3's? The longer he has been in Stotts' system, the farther he has gone from the basket until he is almost exclusively a 3-pt shooter....almost opposite from his first season.
 
Stotts system is take jump shots and 3s and get back on D. What happens is everyone ends up standing around waiting for the ball and the offense stagnates. It becomes very easy and predictable for opponents to defend us. There is no contigency. If we are missing those 3 pointers, missing those jumpers our offense goes to shit and we lose. There has to be a balanced attack when it comes to a succesful offense. There has to be an equilibrium, taking shots both in the paint, a moderate amount of jumpers, and some well placed 3 pointers.
 
Jade Falcon said:
......he's barely above a .500 record in his tenure here.

That's not the record of a failed coach to you?

It is to me. It's not like he just got here or something.
Click to expand...

Honest question not being snarky but you think the Blazer talent, in the West, since Stotts took over should yield an above .500 winning %?
 
calvin natt said:
Honest question not being snarky but you think the Blazer talent, in the West, since Stotts took over should yield an above .500 winning %?
Click to expand...

I'll say this: it could be a LOT better than what it is right now if we didn't keep making the same stupid fucking errors game after game. Eventually, you have to look at the coaching staff for that. I KNOW most of the players on our team are better than they are playing at right now, because I've seen it.
 
200w.gif
 
I'm late to the party, but fuck it the day bbq got me drunk.
Okay I have been a Stotts fan for the duration. But the other night was the first of three strikes, and after three strikes... your out.

He didn't get a strike, until I heard his post game comment that he played small ball to try to counter their small ball.
If we were getting slaughtered, I would accept that, but we were in the game and Nurk was our best player that night.
MY biggest issue with all of this is we are a good team, why the fuck are you adjusting to them????????????
We have the best 2 to 3 players on the court and you adjust to them and dont give it to one of our big three that is the man that night and force them to adjust or us?
This is bullshit right here.
Force them to adjust to us. Don't adjust to them...
Turner as our power forward? I left in the middle of the fourth, because I could see Stotts was gonna go with it for the duration and it wouldn't work....

Now we have a pissed off big man(albeit a drama queen) and a pussy coach that just wants to adjust to others schemes?

Our record is what we are....
 
Last edited:
Chris Craig said:
Stotts system is take jump shots and 3s and get back on D. What happens is everyone ends up standing around waiting for the ball and the offense stagnates. It becomes very easy and predictable for opponents to defend us. There is no contigency. If we are missing those 3 pointers, missing those jumpers our offense goes to shit and we lose. There has to be a balanced attack when it comes to a succesful offense. There has to be an equilibrium, taking shots both in the paint, a moderate amount of jumpers, and some well placed 3 pointers.
Click to expand...

Live and die by the three. Barkley is right.

What team has won by threes? And be real. Threes as the first option or main offensive scheme?
When threes have been relevant on a championship team it has always been icing on the cake and something else was the foundation.

This picknroll is some of the best i've seen in years...from any team!! Build the offense around Nurk's PnR and then the plethora of options we have will come to fruition and we will dominate!!!!
 
The ever-declining effort and listlessness we've seen since around the heartbreaker vs. the Clippers feels like a coaching issue, but the overall decline in 3 point accuracy as a team, and the regression of certain players like Damian, and Harkless from 3, and not having Crabbe are really starting to show up in the offense.

Bottom line: this is a weirdly mismatched set of players, combined with some below average performances, paired with a coach who doesn't seem capable of getting much out of them -- maybe as much of an Olshey problem as it is a Stotts problem? I dunno, almost feels like the chicken or the egg.
 
Orion Bailey said:
I'm late to the party, but fuck it the day bbq got me drunk.
Okay I have been a Stotts fan for the duration. But the other night was the first of three strikes, and after three strikes... your out.

He didn't get a strike, until I heard his post game comment that he played small ball to try to counter their small ball.
If we were getting slaughtered, I would accept that, but we were in the game and Nurk was our best player that night.
MY biggest issue with all of this is we are a good team, why the fuck are you adjusting to them????????????
We have the best 2 to 3 players on the court and you adjust to them and dont give it to one of our big three that is the man that night and force them to adjust or us?
This is bullshit right here.
Force them to adjust to us. Don't adjust to them...
Turner as our power forward? I left in the middle of the fourth, because I could see Stotts was gonna go with it for the duration and it wouldn't work....

Now we have a pissed off big man(albeit a drama queen) and a pussy coach that just wants to adjust to others schemes?

Our record is what we are....
Click to expand...

You don't play small ball to counter small ball...you get big and smother em
 
Orion Bailey said:
Live and die by the three. Barkley is right.

What team has won by threes? And be real. Threes as the first option or main offensive scheme?
When threes have been relevant on a championship team it has always been icing on the cake and something else was the foundation.

This picknroll is some of the best i've seen in years...from any team!! Build the offense around Nurk's PnR and then the plethora of options we have will come to fruition and we will dominate!!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah its it either threes or dame and cj going into a cramped paint with four opponents camped out and instead of passing it out, trying to take some wild lay up, usually losing the ball in the process or completely missing. We have to work on taking high percentage shots. The offense has to keeping moving till we get open clean shots. A flowing offense in constant motion equals high percentage shots. The higher the number of assists the better the offense.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately I cannot see us making the playoffs this year. We are weak, not talented enough. Stotts is to blame too, but I don't think just a better coach is enough. We need better players than Turner, Mo, Aminu etc.
 
This thread keeps mentioning the Dwight Jaynes chatter, so I found it.

http://www.nbcsports.com/northwest/author/dwight-jaynes

Throughout the game Friday night, even while the Trail Blazers were suffering through a rough third quarter, my feeling was that Portland still had control of the game. No matter how poorly the Trail Blazers played, I couldn't envision them actually losing on their home floor to the Brooklyn Nets.
But they did.

How does such a thing happen? Let me count the ways:
  • The most obvious thing first: Jusuf Nurkic didn't play during the final 11 minutes of the game. The Nets went with a small lineup so Portland obliged them by going small, too. In other words, the Nets dictated Portland's lineup throughout the fourth quarter. Nurkic was having a big game and that's the way the Nets lose -- by allowing the other team's big man to score virtually at will. This madness has got to stop. The league's fascination with "going small" is at epidemic proportions and it's fine if you have Draymond Green to defend small men or even Al-Farouq Aminu. But Aminu is out injured -- again -- and not available. And Green doesn't play for Portland. Yet, there the Blazers are, struggling on offense with less than their best lineup on the floor down the stretch of the game. Portland doesn't -- even on a platoon basis in the final minute -- turn the tables and make a little man try to defend Nurkic.
  • All of this happens, of course, because the Trail Blazers are so predictable on defense that teams just go to a high pick-and-roll late in games and wait for Portland;s inevitable switch on the pick. It happens every time and the opposing offense can get that big-on-small matchup whenever it wants. Heck, Portland even switches when there is no pick -- just players changing places. The Nets wanted it virtually every time down the court late in the game, leaving poor Davis, the lone big, to try to keep up with Russell. What would be wrong with changing coverages once in a while? Why not blitz the pick and roll and take the ball out of Russell's hands? I have no idea. But if you're going to just switch that pick-and-roll every time, you might as well leave Nurkic in the game because he'd be just as ineffective as Davis at guarding Russell.
  • Portland's starting guards were just 13-for-32 from the field. The Blazers, as a team, were only 7-for-20 from three-point range. That won't cut it. This team's ball and player movement continues to hit lulls during games. If that cannot be corrected, it's going to be a long season. The last thing I thought we'd be worried about this season with this team is the offense.
  • I'm getting a bit tired of mentioning this, but the Trail Blazers are last in the NBA in fast-break points per game. The only real reason for this to happen is that this team's coaching staff doesn't want it to run. Fast breaks don't happen by accident -- they have to be practiced. Obviously, a decision has been made that the risk (turnovers and rushed shots) is not worth the reward (easy, uncontested baskets). I just don't see how you survive in the NBA without at least an average number of fast breaks. Portland averages 4.6 points per game off the break. Golden State gets 27.2.
The Trail Blazers are better than a 6-6 team, given the schedule they've played so far. I expected much more than this and I think everyone connected with the team did, too.
Click to expand...
 
Nikolokolus said:
The ever-declining effort and listlessness we've seen since around the heartbreaker vs. the Clippers feels like a coaching issue, but the overall decline in 3 point accuracy as a team, and the regression of certain players like Damian, and Harkless from 3, and not having Crabbe are really starting to show up in the offense.

Bottom line: this is a weirdly mismatched set of players, combined with some below average performances, paired with a coach who doesn't seem capable of getting much out of them -- maybe as much of an Olshey problem as it is a Stotts problem? I dunno, almost feels like the chicken or the egg.
Click to expand...
Yep, I have repeatedly said this is a poorly constructed roster especially for the coach we have and style we play
 
jlprk said:
This thread keeps mentioning the Dwight Jaynes chatter, so I found it.

http://www.nbcsports.com/northwest/author/dwight-jaynes
Click to expand...

Dwight wrote about all of that but it's not like it hadn't already been brought up here numerous times. Jaynes was spot on...as have been the people bringing this up not only this year but last season as well. It doesn't make them haters. It makes them observers.
 
Like I said in the game thread (I think?), Terry Stotts is the Mike Riley of the NBA.

Predictable. Makes stupid mistakes. Doesn't instill a good defensive ploy. Produces an easily readable offense and defense. And like how Mike Riley had won just enough to keep the idiots at OSU happy, Terry does just enough to keep people happy with him here.

They need an upgrade at three positions.

1. SF
2. PF
3. Coach.

That isn't listed in order of importance either.
 
Portland averages 4.6 points per game off the break. Golden State gets 27.2.

So, the best team in the league seems to think getting points on fast breaks is a good idea, but we don't? If we have too many turnovers on fast breaks, then maybe we need to practice them more?
 
BonesJones said:
You blame Dwight Jaynes?!

Lmao.
Click to expand...
for the meltdown here...yeah...he primed the pump...and I can't stand the guy...I'm still cheering for the team and enjoying the season....I think the Blazers will be fine...sure we had a stinker against the nets....shit happens...Stotts pulled Nurk......Popovich pulls his starters for entire games all the time....it's how you get a good bench...the way I see it, Stotts trusted the bench and they didn't play well. Trust the process and move on...get the next one. TURNOVERS LOST THE GAME
 
Last edited:
I'm still not a fan of Stotts and if a better replacement can be found, I'm all for it. But the more I read and the more I think about it, I'm good with him benching Nurkic. I myself observed that Nurkic was getting sloppy on the offensive end in the second half. Didn't seem to be making good decisions on when to shoot and when not to, and wasn't in good position to make some of the shots he was trying. Then I read that Vanterpool (a guy I respect) was yelling at him a couple times, apparently concerning lack of hustle on defense. This lack of effort was confirmed by posters on another forum. I'm one of those who say that a shortcoming of Stotts is that he doesn't hold players accountable; well, this time he did, and the guys who were still out there should have been able to carry on and win that game. Stotts tried to help Nurkic save face, by saying he was out because he wanted to match Nets small ball.
I still question whether Davis was the best choice to be out there and the lack of any plan as to what to do if Russel got ISO'd on Davis again, but I'm OK with sitting a guy down if you don't think he is giving defensive effort and is making bad decisions on offense.
 
The game is only on Monday, Wtf... long long time. Im very afraid because I lost all confidence I have in Stotts
 
They need to practice and address some problems that caused losses like the last one...it's good they got a couple days to study film and work on stuff
 
riverman said:
for the meltdown here...yeah...he primed the pump...and I can't stand the guy...I'm still cheering for the team and enjoying the season....I think the Blazers will be fine...sure we had a stinker against the nets....shit happens...Stotts pulled Nurk......Popovich pulls his starters for entire games all the time....it's how you get a good bench...the way I see it, Stotts trusted the bench and they didn't play well. Trust the process and move on...get the next one. TURNOVERS LOST THE GAME
Click to expand...
The problem wasnt the bench in that game we 2 players in double figures and believe we got 30 points off the bench. Our problem is the coaching decision at the end of the games I can over look at if this was the first time to have the wrong personal on the floor during crunch time but this was back to back games he did the same stupid mistake. You must have your best player in at crunch time simple facts and if you lose than lose. But not having one of your best player in there at crunch that don't make sense. You bench Nurk the last 3 plus minutes I believe against Memphis and then the last 11 minutes against the Nets. I am not saying fire Stotts but he has to be smarter though in crunch time. Believe me the players has some faults too for not excuting in crunch time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top