Fire Stotts Eventually (2 Viewers)

[Hoopguru]

The forum survey says!
69 - thinks Terry is 1 best, 23 best 20, 38 best 10, 7 best 5

23 - needs to go
12 - hope he improves

 

[oldfisherman]

Rating coaches is above my pay grade.

If Stotts is fired, the goal should be to hire a replacement that has a proven NBA record of getting the best out of his players.

Who would be better?

The only coach I can think of is
Brad Stevens. But even he has had problems this season.

 

[Hobbesarable]

Rating coaches is above my pay grade.

If Stotts is fired, the goal should be to hire a replacement that has a proven NBA record of getting the best out of his players.

Who would be better?

The only coach I can think of is
Brad Stevens. But even he has had problems this season.

A good scouting program would look at assistant coaches and the NCAA ranks in addition to proven coaches. Even Brad Stevens had to toil in the NCAA before becoming an NBA head coach.

 

[calvin natt]

A good scouting program would look at assistant coaches and the NCAA ranks in addition to proven coaches. Even Brad Stevens had to toil in the NCAA before becoming an NBA head coach.

I think a dangerous way to go is to try to replicate a different successful process even though that seems like the most natural instinct, i.e., Stevens is a great coach so let’s grab a young college coach....because it just depends 100% on the actual person. Many college guys have failed in the NBA. Many assistant coaches have failed. Every year in fact. I think you look at those options but in the end you have to do a ton of due diligence with other people who work with him (or her I guess). There’s a reason Pat Ewing never got a shot in the NBA- he didn’t work hard. There’s a reason PJ Carlesimo didn’t pan out - he coached NBA guys like they were in college and that don’t fly. But you research them and figure this stuff out. There are so many hires that make no sense because the background of these guys. And then of course it’s the dynamic between the roster and coach. They have to match. Don’t stick George Karl with a young Kings team. Dumb.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

There isn’t a coach in the league where every player is happy or likes playing for him. My answer would be “oh really Mo Harkless how about you playing harder and better and more consistently and not cry like a bitch to the assistants”. I’m not sure it’s obvious there are a ton of other ways to build your offense with this roster without being heavy, heavy guard oriented and giving those two a lot of freedom. I have a feeling if Stotts did NOT do that, we’d be sitting around saying “wtf why are we giving shots to Mo and Aminu and Evan and not giving more freedom to our two best scorers and players”.

Just to put a bow on this thing. I’m not a die hard Stotts or Olshey guy. I just don’t think they are all to blame. It’s a players league. Stotts has managed to win a lot of games in Portland with a less than ideal roster. Neil like I said a few weeks ago does some things well imo but he needs some additional staff to kick this things into a higher sense of urgency.

I feel like you and I dont agree much, but you’re one of my favorite posters. I appreciate the way you portray you opinions.

I dont think I know basketball better than Stotts. I dont think Stotts is an idiot and who knows what Ive said in a game threads, I hope I havent been too bad.

Anyways I really dont like a few things about Stotts. A). He’s been completely out coached in the playoffs. B). His play book seems to not really change, maybe some wrinkles get thrown in there, but usually when the ball gets to half court I can tell what play they’re running. I know I watch a lot of basketball but if I know it I have to imagine the other teams know it.
C). Moe and Aminu - This isnt all on Stotts they are probably the best SF/PF’s on the team but I get tired of teams begging those two to beat them.
D)Zach, he was drafted and sold as a foundational piece and I feel like the 2nd unit has been trying to showcase ET’s skillset and doesnt play to Zachs strengths at all.
E). Defensive Schemes, I dont like how scheme wise the guards always end up behind the play. The scheme works well with Nurkic because he can take up so much space, but they have a problem guarding the 3 point line because a guard being behind the play usually means switches and rotations are late. They dont often change things up on defense either.
It feels like at times they’re playing with fire letting guys get good looks.

I think Stotts is an “ok” Coach, and yes the Blazers could do much worse. Id love to see what they looked like with a new coach.

 

[Hobbesarable]

I don't expect anything to change (with GM or coach) until new ownership takes over. Let me know when that happens. I'm out of this thread for the time being.

 

[BonesJones]

I feel like you and I dont agree much, but you’re one of my favorite posters. I appreciate the way you portray you opinions.

I dont think I know basketball better than Stotts. I dont think Stotts is an idiot and who knows what Ive said in a game threads, I hope I havent been too bad.

Anyways I really dont like a few things about Stotts. A). He’s been completely out coached in the playoffs. B). His play book seems to not really change, maybe some wrinkles get thrown in there, but usually when the ball gets to half court I can tell what play they’re running. I know I watch a lot of basketball but if I know it I have to imagine the other teams know it.
C). Moe and Aminu - This isnt all on Stotts they are probably the best SF/PF’s on the team but I get tired of teams begging those two to beat them.
D)Zach, he was drafted and sold as a foundational piece and I feel like the 2nd unit has been trying to showcase ET’s skillset and doesnt play to Zachs strengths at all.
E). Defensive Schemes, I dont like how scheme wise the guards always end up behind the play. The scheme works well with Nurkic because he can take up so much space, but they have a problem guarding the 3 point line because a guard being behind the play usually means switches and rotations are late. They dont often change things up on defense either.
It feels like at times they’re playing with fire letting guys get good looks.

I think Stotts is an “ok” Coach, and yes the Blazers could do much worse. Id love to see what they looked like with a new coach.

At rotations and a team that's not effectively coached to play productively in transition.

 

[blue9]

I dont think I know basketball better than Stotts.
...

A). He’s been completely out coached in the playoffs. B). His play book seems to not really change, maybe some wrinkles get thrown in there, but usually when the ball gets to half court I can tell what play they’re running. I know I watch a lot of basketball but if I know it I have to imagine the other teams know it.
C). Moe and Aminu - This isnt all on Stotts they are probably the best SF/PF’s on the team but I get tired of teams begging those two to beat them.
D)Zach, he was drafted and sold as a foundational piece and I feel like the 2nd unit has been trying to showcase ET’s skillset and doesnt play to Zachs strengths at all.
E). Defensive Schemes, I dont like how scheme wise the guards always end up behind the play. The scheme works well with Nurkic because he can take up so much space, but they have a problem guarding the 3 point line because a guard being behind the play usually means switches and rotations are late. They dont often change things up on defense either.
It feels like at times they’re playing with fire letting guys get good looks.

Looks to me like you know basketball better than Stotts!

 

[Hoopguru]

Is fairly obvious that Stotts is a top ten coach. I would venture to say that if you surveyed all other coaches and players they would have him at or in the top ten coaches.

 

[calvin natt]

Is fairly obvious that Stotts is a top ten coach. I would venture to say that if you surveyed all other coaches and players they would have him at or in the top ten coaches.

I also think one thing people don't take into consideration is that there is a difference between not liking a coaches style vs a bad coach. You may not like Stotts' style of play, that doesn't make him a bad coach. If you like running, Stotts aint your guy. Not sure that makes sense but it does in my brain.

 

[blue9]

Is fairly obvious that Stotts is a top ten coach. I would venture to say that if you surveyed all other coaches and players they would have him at or in the top ten coaches.

Pops
Carlisle
Gentry
Stevens
Snyder
Kerr
D'Antoni
Rivers
Joerger
Budenholzer
Spo

I don't even know who's coaching DEN, PHI, TOR, MIL but they're probably better than Stotts. And I don't even particularly like half the names I listed, but they've all proven more that Stotts.

 

[Hoopguru]

Pops
Carlisle
Gentry
Stevens
Snyder
Kerr
D'Antoni
Rivers
Joerger
Budenholzer
Spo

I don't even know who's coaching DEN, PHI, TOR, MIL but they're probably better than Stotts. And I don't even particularly like half the names I listed, but they've all proven more that Stotts.

Joerger isn't any better than Stotts either is Synder. D'Antoni? Put Stotts in Houston and they be as good if not better.

Google 2018/2019 NBA GM survey and looks at where they have Terry.

 

[hoopsjock]

I also think one thing people don't take into consideration is that there is a difference between not liking a coaches style vs a bad coach. You may not like Stotts' style of play, that doesn't make him a bad coach. If you like running, Stotts aint your guy. Not sure that makes sense but it does in my brain.

But if you watch Stotts during a game he is quite often yelling at his team (Dame) to push the ball and "Go, go, go". The fact that his team seemingly ignores these directions tells me a lot. It's not about style, it's about the lack of accountability.

Earlier in the year a big deal was made when Stotts made the team watch 45 minutes of game film instead of the usual 0-20 minutes. Going over film is how you learn to grow and improve. You also pick up on other team's tendencies which can be a huge advantage (ask playoff Rondo about this).

 

[blue9]

Joerger isn't any better than Stotts either is Synder. D'Antoni? Put Stotts in Houston and they be as good if not better.

Maybe. Maybe. Maybe.
Joerger definitely had MEM in a much better place than Terry has ever had the Blazers. Snyder has (had) the Jazz playing a much better style of ball than we've ever played under Terry. D'Antoni is clearly a much better offensive coach...and since Terry isn't much of a defensive coach that means D'Antoni is just plain better.

All of them have better winning percentages in both the regular season and Playoffs. I'm not sure there's any way in which you could say that Terry is better (or equal) to any of them.

Google 2018/2019 NBA GM survey and looks at where they have Terry.

Don't care. Like coaches, I don't have a high opinion of most GMs. It's all a good ol' boys club where the same chumps exchange jobs regardless of whether they're actually good at them. There are probably about 5 good coaches/GMs and the rest are irrelevant at best and downright awful at worst.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[Hoopguru]

Maybe. Maybe. Maybe.
Joerger definitely had MEM in a much better place than Terry has ever had the Blazers. Snyder has (had) the Jazz playing a much better style of ball than we've ever played under Terry. D'Antoni is clearly a much better offensive coach...and since Terry isn't much of a defensive coach that means D'Antoni is just plain better.

All of them have better winning percentages in both the regular season and Playoffs. I'm not sure there's any way in which you could say that Terry is better (or equal) to any of them.


Don't care. Like coaches, I don't have a high opinion of most GMs. It's all a good ol' boys club where the same chumps exchange jobs regardless of whether they're actually good at them. There are probably about 5 good coaches/GMs and the rest are irrelevant at best and downright awful at worst.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Everywhere MD coached he had much better talent than Portland, except maybe the year before LA left.
Look at the job he did in NY with a mix roster much like Portland has had o0f late. He is a good offensive coach, with 2 or more super stars. Phoenix & Houston, imo, would have been as good with Stotts at the helm. I really think Terry has done more with less than many coaches.

 

[James lamphear]

Maybe. Maybe. Maybe.
Joerger definitely had MEM in a much better place than Terry has ever had the Blazers. Snyder has (had) the Jazz playing a much better style of ball than we've ever played under Terry. D'Antoni is clearly a much better offensive coach...and since Terry isn't much of a defensive coach that means D'Antoni is just plain better.

All of them have better winning percentages in both the regular season and Playoffs. I'm not sure there's any way in which you could say that Terry is better (or equal) to any of them.


Don't care. Like coaches, I don't have a high opinion of most GMs. It's all a good ol' boys club where the same chumps exchange jobs regardless of whether they're actually good at them. There are probably about 5 good coaches/GMs and the rest are irrelevant at best and downright awful at worst.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Without Harden D'antioni wouldn't be anything. His offense run good when he has a good play maker. Houston and Phoenix he had good play maker. New York he didn't so he wasn't successful.

 

[bobf]

I don't know enough about coaches to rank really, but put I put Stotts as top 10. I would definitely pick Pop and Stevens as top the top two. IMO Stotts is the best Blazer coach since Rick Adelman. I don't think D'Antoni is anything special.

 

[James lamphear]

I don't dislike Stotts but some of his schemes I don't like. But really he not being dealt a good hand by Olshey with some of his roster decisions he made for this franchise. But also some of Stotts decisions he makes I have questioned on. Do I think he needs to be fire I say no right now. Due to the starting to play decent right now on both ends and that show me hasn't lost this team yet. I can see why some of you guys would like to see him to be fire. Believe me sometime I feel the same way. Do I believe another coach could make this team more successful I say no. This team is about as good as they can get right now due to the roster. They always going be between from 44-50 wins season and maybe they get in the 2nd round. That about as far this team can go without some upgrades on the roster.

 

[blue9]

Everywhere MD coached he had much better talent than Portland, except maybe the year before LA left.
Look at the job he did in NY with a mix roster much like Portland has had o0f late. He is a good offensive coach, with 2 or more super stars. Phoenix & Houston, imo, would have been as good with Stotts at the helm. I really think Terry has done more with less than many coaches.

I don't give two shits about Mike - I certainly wouldn't want to hire him as Terry's replacement. But anyone who watches basketball can clearly see that he has a much better understanding of offense than Terry. I think you're probably the only person on the planet that thinks PHX would have been the same had they swapped Mike/Terry.

 

[BonesJones]

I also think one thing people don't take into consideration is that there is a difference between not liking a coaches style vs a bad coach. You may not like Stotts' style of play, that doesn't make him a bad coach. If you like running, Stotts aint your guy. Not sure that makes sense but it does in my brain.

Some styles of play areworse, so they can be kinda synonymous. I dont like that he doesnt have diversity in his sets, or the fact that his teams cant exploit transition opportunities, or that his offense tends to dissolve into crummy shots out of isolation. That's style of play, and also part of the reason why he's a bad coach.

 

[Hoopguru]

I don't give two shits about Mike - I certainly wouldn't want to hire him as Terry's replacement. But anyone who watches basketball can clearly see that he has a much better understanding of offense than Terry. I think you're probably the only person on the planet that thinks PHX would have been the same had they swapped Mike/Terry.

Terry was the offensive guru behind Dallas's championship. Maybe he's not the better of the two offensively but he gets more out of what he has to work with then Mike does and has.

 

[blue9]

Terry was the offensive guru behind Dallas's championship. Maybe he's not the better of the two offensively but he gets more out of what he has to work with then Mike does and has.

I don't buy it. Head coaches always say that shit when their assistants get hired away. When it comes to talking about their colleagues it's all blowing smoke up each others asses. Terry may have had input that lead to a single, flukey championship. But that was Carlisle's team - not Terry's. As we've seen over the past 7 (?) years, Terry is no guru.

But again, this isn't about Mike. I don't like him at all. This is about Terry NOT being a good coach. I ran off quite a long list of coaches who are better, and somehow it's turned into a "Mike isn't better than Terry" conversation. He is better, but it doesn't even matter because Terry sucks regardless of how good or crappy Mike is.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

I noticed a commentator wrote recently that on SanAntonio, only really good three point shooters take 3 point shots. Why isn't it a rule for Blazers that Turner and Nurk don't take long 2 point or 3 point shots?

 

[CupWizier]

I noticed a commentator wrote recently that on SanAntonio, only really good three point shooters take 3 point shots. Why isn't it a rule for Blazers that Turner and Nurk don't take long 2 point or 3 point shots?

Turner averages about the same amount of attempts as Derozan from the 3 point line but neither one of them shoot them very often. Turner even has a better average than Derozan.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Turner averages about the same amount of attempts as Derozan from the 3 point line but neither one of them shoot them very often. Turner even has a better average than Derozan.

Turner attempts 1.3 3 pointers per 36, while De Rozan attemps .9; considering that DeRozan is the primary creator for his team and therefore may be forced to take shots late in the shot clock; I think that is a significant difference.

 

[CupWizier]

Turner attempts 1.3 3 pointers per 36, while De Rozan attemps .9; considering that DeRozan is the primary creator for his team and therefore may be forced to take shots late in the shot clock; I think that is a significant difference.

Your splitting hairs as neither attempt very many 3 point shots.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Your splitting hairs as neither attempt very many 3 point shots.

Not to mention that he also mentioned "long 2's" along with 3's; per bbref, 12.2% of Turner's shots are 3's, and 14.1% are long 2's, so 26.3% total. It's true that Derozan shoots far fewer 3's--only 5% of his shots, but 22.9% of his shots are long 2's. So all total, 27.9% of Derozan's shots are in that less desirable category, actually a higher rate than Turner.

 

[Natebishop3]

A) Pop is the best ever imo so it’s tough to hold him as the barometer for coaches but ok
B) the Spurs, because of Pop, have one of the most strict and non-negotiable basketball “climates” in the NBA. There is “the Spurs way”- an actual thing. You do it his way or you are gone. Kawhi didn’t like it. They do things that no other team does on a daily basis. Perhaps it’s his Air Force background. He is open minded on societal and social issues, which i love. But in basketball? No.

Pop couldn't win before Tim Duncan and he hasn't won without Tim Duncan. I'm not necessarily sold on him being a shining example of how to win.

 

[TBpup]

Blazers are tearing it up against the East but are only 14-15 against the West. Since their first 3 rounds would be against the West, that doesn't strike me as particularly confidence inspiring. Stotts has been around a ~.500 coach most of his career and it's not really getting any better. Add in the 11-24 Playoff record over 11 seasons as a Head Coach and that averages out to 1 Playoff victory a year.

That is NOT good.

 

[calvin natt]

Pop couldn't win before Tim Duncan and he hasn't won without Tim Duncan. I'm not necessarily sold on him being a shining example of how to win.

LOL, ok.