Fire Stotts Eventually

[PtldPlatypus]

Look man, he played on a Championship Team and has the experience, He knows which player you need to be succesful, i bet he knows more about roster construction than 90% of the GM's in this League. Like scalma said someone will give him a chance in the future and this team should be the Blazers

The same argument was made on behalf of Derek Fisher being a head coach, or Steve Kerr as a GM (in Phoenix). Sometimes being a cerebral player on a title team means you'll be good in other positions; more often than not, it doesn't.

 

[oldmangrouch]

The same argument was made on behalf of Derek Fisher being a head coach, or Steve Kerr as a GM (in Phoenix). Sometimes being a cerebral player on a title team means you'll be good in other positions; more often than not, it doesn't.

Very true. Every coach and GM gets a first break somewhere. Even the ones who wind up enjoying long-term success often struggle that first time around. It's a sad comment that our team has to even consider that sort of gamble. Under a generous owner like PA, this should have been a plum job. If it wasn't seen as a desirable job before, the current uncertainty must put us at the bottom of the barrel.

 

[BonesJones]

Really, what championship team has Billups built? You can't say he knows how to build a championship team when he's never even held a job in a front office.

Danny Ainge?

Chauncey was always a very smart player, and a PG. The way he talks about the game he seems to know what he's doing. I also think he'd be aggressive, and it's the type of GM who could actually sell free agents.

 

[hoopsjock]

Danny Ainge?

Chauncey was always a very smart player, and a PG. The way he talks about the game he seems to know what he's doing. I also think he'd be aggressive, and it's the type of GM who could actually sell free agents.

Yes, there examples of it working out both ways.

 

[BonesJones]

Beware of what happened in CHI. They tried to pull a 180 and let go of Hoiberg for a guy who was more of a hardass. He lost the team in 3 days.

Keep going back to this. What do we want differently that Stotts doesn't offer?

I hate the idea of changing a coach JUST for a change given the roster we have. Won't do a damn thing outside of the natural new coach bump.

GarPax is the worst duo in any front office.

We dont need a drill sargeant.

Maybe I see the issues because I'm consistently logging possessions, but we have basically no action that ends up with someone putting pressure towards the rim unless it's an isolation. Where 28th in assists per game after being 30th last year. We run the same pick n roll defense for Rajon Rondo as we do for Steph Curry. We chase guys over pick n rolls even if were at a horrible angle to do so. Thats a few examples. How are any of those things due to a lack of talent? How couldn't a different head coach fix any of those things? This is what I want changes in.

 

[BonesJones]

So many of you are looking for quick changes, but I seriously doubt that the Blazers are thinking about making GM/Coach changes at this juncture. Everyone knows that the team will likely be sold within the next year or so and, when that happens, the new ownership is going to want to make its own decisions on these positions. If Stotts were to be fired, Vulcan isn't going to get into a major head coach search and no decent coaching prospect is going to want to come in with ownership up in the air. We'd be looking at one of the assistants running things for a year or so with the infamous "interim" attached to his title. That's not likely to make things better. I'd say a trade is a much more likely event.

Quick? Compared to long changes? I've been asking for this for two years now. How are we asking for a quick change?

Right now, the coaching cant get worse. David Vanterpool would be a solid interim and I think we'd improve under him.

 

[BonesJones]

The same argument was made on behalf of Derek Fisher being a head coach, or Steve Kerr as a GM (in Phoenix). Sometimes being a cerebral player on a title team means you'll be good in other positions; more often than not, it doesn't.

Chauncey is more GM material than both of those guys combined.

 

[e_blazer]

Quick? Compared to long changes? I've been asking for this for two years now. How are we asking for a quick change?

Right now, the coaching cant get worse. David Vanterpool would be a solid interim and I think we'd improve under him.

Quick, as in moves to improve the roster from this moment in time, not from when you got the notion that you wanted a change. Unless you've got a time machine, that's not particularly helpful.

And, I was referring to the increasing call around here for Neil's head, since he's the GM who is responsible for this roster.

Edit: Oops. Wrong thread, my bad. This one is about both Terry and Neil.

 

[BonesJones]

Quick, as in moves to improve the roster from this moment in time, not from when you got the notion that you wanted a change. Unless you've got a time machine, that's not particularly helpful.

And, I was referring to the increasing call around here for Neil's head, since he's the GM who is responsible for this roster.

Edit: Oops. Wrong thread, my bad. This one is about both Terry and Neil.

Wouldn't any change qualify as "quick"?

 

[dviss1]

Chauncey Billups is being very overrated. He gave a player evaluation a few days ago and I'm like WTF are you talking about?

 

[hoopsjock]

Chauncey Billups is being very overrated. He gave a player evaluation a few days ago and I'm like WTF are you talking about?

That's how I felt during summer league when a bunch of scrub players that didn't make a roster where guys he'd "want on his roster".

 

[e_blazer]

Wouldn't any change qualify as "quick"?

Oh, now you're getting all metaphysical on me. We can discuss whether time is an illusion in the OT section, but for the purpose of this discussion let's go with a change being quick in terms of today's discussion if it happens, you know, quickly. Now, whether the change is also "good" or not, that's another discussion.

At least we never run out of material around here.

 

[BonesJones]

Oh, now you're getting all metaphysical on me. We can discuss whether time is an illusion in the OT section, but for the purpose of this discussion let's go with a change being quick in terms of today's discussion if it happens, you know, quickly. Now, whether the change is also "good" or not, that's another discussion.

At least we never run out of material around here.

You're the one who used the phrase, Im trying to figure out wtf you're talking about. Apparently you dont even know.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

 

[Propagandist]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

This can only be proven by firing Stotts then giving the new guy five years to make something happen. THEN we'll know who is to blame!

 

[BonesJones]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

Oh, Stotts has assembled a team that's the worst in the league at moving the ball? The worst team in regards to knowing how, when, and where to cut? The worst team in terms of creating action towards the rim outside of isolation and pick n roll?

Theres still some of you guys that need to see through the Olshey hate (even if its justified).

 

[Chris Craig]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

They are both the problem. Olshey can't get any decent players here and totally fucked us signing Turner, Meyers, Crabbe and Harkless. It will be another year at least till we get rid of those guys. He couldn't get anyone. Before Turner he was going after an injured Parsons. WTF was he thinking.

Stotts can't figure out how to use players in a system together. He can't adapt to other teams. Its the same shit different day. He is not a good coach. He sucked in Atlanta, he sucked in Milwaukee, he only won in Dallas because of Carlisle, and he still sucks here.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

They are both the problem. Olshey can't any decent players here and totally fucked us signing Turner, Meyers, Crabbe and Harkless. It will be another year at least till we get rid of those guys. He couldn't get anyone. Before Turner he was going after an injured Parsons. WTF was he thinking.

Stotts can't figure out how to use players in a system together. He can't adapt to other teams. Its the same shit different day. He is not a good coach. He sucked in Atlanta, he sucked in Milwaukee, he only won in Dallas because of Carlisle, and ge still sucks here.

Not that Carlisle has done anything special without Stotts. Maybe they both suck.

 

[3putt]

Oh, Stotts has assembled a team that's the worst in the league at moving the ball? The worst team in regards to knowing how, when, and where to cut? The worst team in terms of creating action towards the rim outside of isolation and pick n roll?

Theres still some of you guys that need to see through the Olshey hate (even if its justified).

I agree about the system. That has to be Stotts fault. The only other thing is that you can say he has a bunch of players that cannot learn a system. So you either have to say the guys just can’t grasp the system or it’s so damn unconventional it makes them uncomfortable. I blame the system cause seems like all the players they shuffle in and out all look lost at some point. It can’t be that they all are too stupid to grasp it.

 

[e_blazer]

You're the one who used the phrase, Im trying to figure out wtf you're talking about. Apparently you dont even know.

Hunh. I thought we were just playing around here. To me, it’s odd that you seem to get offended by it.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I wonder how Dame feels about Stotts right now?

 

[hoopsjock]

I wonder how Dame feels about Stotts right now?

"It's just a tough stretch in the schedule. Everything is perfectly fine!"

 

[3putt]

"It's just a tough stretch in the schedule. Everything is perfectly fine!"

 

[oldmangrouch]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

This was my position for a long time. It started to fall apart during the Pelican debacle where Stotts was pretty much a complete non-factor. Then we have the current season. The Blazers proved early that they could win if they played the right way....so where does the blame for the total collapse go? Stotts has turned into Mo Cheeks, standing on the sidelines with nothing to offer but a puzzled look.

Don't get me wrong - I still view Olshey as below average and want him gone, but he needs to take Stotts with him!

 

[hoopsjock]

This was my position for a long time. It started to fall apart during the Pelican debacle where Stotts was pretty much a complete non-factor. Then we have the current season. The Blazers proved early that they could win if they played the right way....so where does the blame for the total collapse go? Stotts has turned into Mo Cheeks, standing on the sidelines with nothing to offer but a puzzled look.

Don't get me wrong - I still view Olshey as below average and want him gone, but he needs to take Stotts with him!

Just curious, if the roster has proven they can win if they play the right way then what makes Olshey below average?

 

[oldmangrouch]

Oh, Stotts has assembled a team that's the worst in the league at moving the ball? The worst team in regards to knowing how, when, and where to cut? The worst team in terms of creating action towards the rim outside of isolation and pick n roll?

Theres still some of you guys that need to see through the Olshey hate (even if its justified).

Fans have a natural inclination to seek a simple, clear explanation why their favorite team is disappointing them. I've been following the NBA since before the Blazers existed - and I still fell into the trap. I was so focused on Olshey putting together a flawed roster I gave Stotts a pass. I figured it out (if a little late) so I am somewhat hopeful other Blazer fans will.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Just curious, if the roster has proven they can win if they play the right way then what makes Olshey below average?

I say that based on his complete body of work. (EG inability to build a decent bench, unbalanced rosters, his failures in managing the payroll) Frankly, I also dislike his attitude toward the fans.

 

[hoopsjock]

I say that based on his complete body of work. (EG inability to build a decent bench, unbalanced rosters, his failures in managing the payroll) Frankly, I also dislike his attitude toward the fans.

Bench - Is this coaching or roster? It's probably a bit of both but there's been guys like Vonleh, Will Barton, and Pat Connaughton that are being utilized better elsewhere.

Unbalanced rosters - Would winning more and playing better increase trade value? Of course, this is probably both too. The unbalanced rosters have proven they can win at a high level for stretches of the regular season (10-3 start this year, 13 game winning streak last year, Nurk Fever 20 games, and the 2nd half of the 2015-16 season).

Managing Payroll - Until this year I don't think they've been in the luxury tax at all under his tenure. The bad contracts of 2016 definitely put him in the position to have to cut salary though.

Attitude - No excuse for that, he's a smug jerk.

 

[BonesJones]

Fans have a natural inclination to seek a simple, clear explanation why their favorite team is disappointing them. I've been following the NBA since before the Blazers existed - and I still fell into the trap. I was so focused on Olshey putting together a flawed roster I gave Stotts a pass. I figured it out (if a little late) so I am somewhat hopeful other Blazer fans will.

Thats what I've been saying for a while. I dont blame you at all though. It's hard to really observe and analyze the intricacies of the game, especially since most of us dont watch a lot of other NBA teams to compare it too, and our defense doesnt really make teams work for any shot like most defenses, it's designed to encourage specific shots.

I feel like playing as much as I did changed the way I view the game and helped me notice some things. Some people aren't as lucky.

 

[tester551]

Stotts is not the problem. He's working with what Neil assembled.

Olshey is the problem.

Stotts has been a head coach 2 other times. We've seen him coach with different rosters.

Stotts is only a decent coach. He has a good rapoir with the players..... prefect for an assistant coach.