Fire Stotts Eventually (3 Viewers)

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: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
It's rare for a coach to be fired mid-season unless they're viewed as a tire fire. Regardless of sentiment in this thread, it's very obvious that Olshey and any other decision-makers don't see Stotts as a tire fire. If Olshey has stuck with Stotts this long, he obviously respects Stotts as a coach. So, if he replaces Stotts, it almost certainly won't happen til the off-season.

Thus, I don't consider this any kind of bombshell, or even news, from Quick. It seems fairly obvious.
 
Minstrel said:
It's rare for a coach to be fired mid-season unless they're viewed as a tire fire. Regardless of sentiment in this thread, it's very obvious that Olshey and any other decision-makers don't see Stotts as a tire fire. If Olshey has stuck with Stotts this long, he obviously respects Stotts as a coach. So, if he replaces Stotts, it almost certainly won't happen til the off-season.

Thus, I don't consider this any kind of bombshell, or even news, from Quick. It seems fairly obvious.
Click to expand...

I don't think the article was intended as any kind of a bombshell, just more a case of looking at just how hot Terry's coaching seat has become. I'm not going to post the entire article, but these two paragraphs are pretty much in line with the way the rest of it goes:

"But what has become especially concerning lately is the staggering lack of fight against top-caliber teams, as well as some puzzling flat performances, the latest on Sunday when a struggling Charlotte team put up 44 points in the first quarter despite playing without Gordon Hayward, LaMelo Ball and Devonte’ Graham. It was the fifth time Portland has allowed 40 or more points in the first quarter and the eighth time overall.

Compounding the poor defense, the blowout losses to good teams, the absence of fight, and the lack of preparedness to open games is what has amounted to a grasping-for-straws approach from Stotts. One game he debuts Nassir Little at shooting guard — a move that actually paid dividends — after which he says “we’ll be doing it again … we have to continue to see how he does in that role” only to … never again see what he can do in that role."

I guess the thing that surprised me about the article is that it doesn't point out that while Terry's undoubtedly got a very hot seat, Olshey absolutely has to have one of his own for his own ineptness. His big moves this offseason to acquire Covington and Jones Jr., which were intended to bolster Olshey's decision to "go for it" and boost the defense, have been a major bust. Acquiring Powell at the deadline, which was intended to waken the team by providing a seasoned veteran who is both a good scorer and a solid defender, has produced squat. I can't imagine a scenario where, if the final 16 games continue the recent trends, both Neil and Terry aren't sent packing by Jody Allen and the Vulcans.
 
e_blazer said:
I guess the thing that surprised me about the article is that it doesn't point out that while Terry's undoubtedly got a very hot seat, Olshey absolutely has to have one of his own for his own ineptness. His big moves this offseason to acquire Covington and Jones Jr., which were intended to bolster Olshey's decision to "go for it" and boost the defense, have been a major bust. Acquiring Powell at the deadline, which was intended to waken the team by providing a seasoned veteran who is both a good scorer and a solid defender, has produced squat. I can't imagine a scenario where, if the final 16 games continue the recent trends, both Neil and Terry aren't sent packing by Jody Allen and the Vulcans.
Click to expand...

If Quick is right, that is interesting, yeah. I have no problem with Stotts' seat being "hot," or him being dismissed. But Olshey has to go too. It makes no sense at all to me to fire Stotts but keep Olshey. The two have presided over a consistently mediocre roster (that had one good run to the WCF). If this era isn't good enough (and I don't think it's what the franchise should settle for), both architects of the era need to go.
 
tester551 said:
I can only take re-runs for so long...
I've chose not to watch more games this season than I have in the last 5 years combined. If my interest in this team is waning - I have to assume that is the case for most others as well.
Click to expand...

same here....I've been able to find better ways to spend 2.5 hours of my time this season much more often than in the 8 years of Stolshey combined before this season. Blazer DNA is set by gawd and Olshey believes in it and won't change it; or rather, he believes in his 650K/month salary for not making waves
 
tester551 said:
I can only take re-runs for so long...
I've chose not to watch more games this season than I have in the last 5 years combined. If my interest in this team is waning - I have to assume that is the case for most others as well.
Click to expand...

feels like we’ve been watching the same team ever since Aldridge left. Some of the names change, but it’s the same shit.
 
Freshtown said:
Can someone post the quick article?
Click to expand...

Terry Stotts and the hot seat in Portland: As season shortens, Blazers' concerns lengthen

With only 16 regular season games remaining, it appears Trail Blazers coach Terry Stotts will last through this season.

After that?

Barring an extended postseason run, or a vast improvement on defense, there figures to be a long, hard look taken at the longtime coach.

The Blazers have made move (Robert Covington) after move (Derrick Jones Jr.) after move (Norman Powell), after move (Rondae Hollis-Jefferson) to improve a laughable defense from a season ago, and yet find themselves even worse on defense this season, ranking 29th out of 30 teams.

But what has become especially concerning lately is the staggering lack of fight against top-caliber teams, as well as some puzzling flat performances, the latest on Sunday when a struggling Charlotte team put up 44 points in the first quarter despite playing without Gordon Hayward, LaMelo Ball and Devonte’ Graham. It was the fifth time Portland has allowed 40 or more points in the first quarter and the eighth time overall.

Compounding the poor defense, the blowout losses to good teams, the absence of fight, and the lack of preparedness to open games is what has amounted to a grasping-for-straws approach from Stotts. One game he debuts Nassir Little at shooting guard — a move that actually paid dividends — after which he says “we’ll be doing it again … we have to continue to see how he does in that role” only to … never again see what he can do in that role.

Then on Sunday in Charlotte, Stotts not only started Hollis-Jefferson in favor of Jones, but also he didn’t play Jones at all. Not a minute as Charlotte rolled to its 44-point quarter. Not a minute while the Blazers fell behind by 29 in the third quarter. Not a second in the entire game.

Keep in mind, Hollis-Jefferson that day was signed to his second 10-day contract. Jones was the Blazers’ top free-agent signing of the offseason, a defensive-minded player who has the second-most blocks in the NBA for players 6-foot-7 or shorter.

The only thing worse than the Blazers’ play, and Stotts’ decisions, are his efforts to explain them. Never much for informing the fan base on his rationale in the first place, Stotts has become defensive, evasive and at times just bizarre in answering the simplest of questions.

When asked what the team needs to do to get out of its funk after an April 11 loss to Miami, Stotts latched onto the word funk, saying “I don’t necessarily want to concede that we are in a funk … I wouldn’t call it a funk … I’m reluctant to say we are in a funk, so I guess I can’t answer that question if I don’t believe the premise.”

When he said that, the Blazers had lost four of six, losing by 18 to the Bucks, 17 to the Clippers, 18 to the Jazz and nine to Miami. And really, the final scores were not indicative of how emphatically they were beaten. And their two wins in that stretch? Against Oklahoma City and Detroit, two of the bottom teams in the NBA.

Funk, slump, rut … whatever. Stotts shuffled the grenade to avoid answering the question, and we are beginning to see why: He doesn’t have the answers.

That brings us back to Sunday in Charlotte. Starting a player on his second 10-day contract? Fine. Mix it up. See if you find lightning in a bottle. But not using Jones at all? Sure, Jones hasn’t been lighting the world on fire, but his production has waned after his playing time was greatly reduced in the wake of the trade for Powell.

Sources say Jones was not injured and that his attitude has been good, so his benching wasn’t for disciplinary reasons. So I asked Stotts why Jones didn’t play at all?

"Well, it wasn’t about not playing him at all,” Stotts said. “You know, it was about getting Rondae in the starting lineup, providing some energy, honestly. We’ve got him for 10 more days, and I thought it was a good matchup for him. It wasn’t about not playing Derrick at all — that’s kind of the way it played out, but that wasn’t necessarily the plan going into it. But that was the reason, it wasn’t a decision not to play Derrick.”

I countered by pointing out that Jones is not just some player. The team used its full mid-level exception in free agency to sign him for more than $9 million this season. All of a sudden a player on a 10-day contract takes precedent?

“Well, I’m not going to disparage Derrick,” Stotts said. “I just thought it was the best move for this team at this point.”

Earlier in the month, after the team was waxed in Utah, and Jones played only 15 minutes, I asked Stotts why Jones was the player whose minutes were being tapered, considering the team was faring so poorly defensively.

“Well, I’ll say this: We were 29th in defense when Derrick was starting and we are 29th in defense now,” Stotts said. “Obviously, with Norman coming in, the three-guard lineup has been productive for us, and we have to work through the rotation as far as how we manage the minutes going from there.”

From afar, it would appear Stotts has adeptly kept the Blazers (32-24) afloat despite injuries to starters Jusuf Nurkic (missed 10 weeks) and CJ McCollum (missed eight weeks) and key reserve Zach Collins (has not played). A big reason they are sitting in sixth in the West has been their 22-8 record in “clutch” games (defined by the league as a game within five points at any time in the last five minutes), which has largely been fueled by an MVP-caliber season from Damian Lillard.

But to close observers and those around the team, the season has been a grind even after Nurkic and McCollum have returned and Powell — a clear upgrade over Gary Trent Jr. — joined the team in a trade.

At the center of the grind has been Lillard, who hasn’t looked like the superhero who has so often rescued Stotts and the Blazers with dramatic late-season play. Part of that is because he has been battling nagging injuries — he will miss his third straight game Tuesday against the Clippers with a hamstring injury — but some of it has been the boldness and frequency teams are blitzing him. Opponents have become almost brazen in their defensive approach to Lillard, picking him up as he crosses half court, in part because they were confident Stotts didn’t have a counterpunch or answer.

That changed last week after the Miami loss, when Stotts took a page out of his early years in Portland and had both Lillard and McCollum more active off the ball, setting screens and cutting. The result was a season-high 31 assists, a more aesthetically pleasing product and a rare competitive game against a quality opponent, albeit a 116-115 loss.

Stotts has one year left on his contract, which pays him $7 million annually, and the question isn’t whether he is a good coach — he has led Portland to the playoffs in seven consecutive seasons and to the Western Conference finals in 2019 — but whether after nine seasons he can take them to the next level. With only 16 games left in the regular season, the patterns developing are concerning, particularly the Blazers’ 1-8 record against the West teams above them in the standings. Their only win against that group is at the Lakers in the season’s third game.

It’s not just the record against good teams. It’s how they are losing. They have lost to Utah by 20 and 18. To Phoenix by 32, the Clippers by 23 and 17. And the last time they played Dallas, the team only two games behind them, Portland lost by 40. In some of those games — like when the Clippers scored 47 in the first quarter — they are out of it before they break a sweat. And in others, the Blazers simply crumble at the first turn of momentum.

As Lillard so matter-of-factly put it after a 122-103 loss at Utah on April 8: “When we play against the top-level teams, we don’t play well. We get put away. At Phoenix, we got put away. Tonight, we got put away. At Denver, we got put away. Milwaukee at home, put away. Clippers, put away. I mean, it’s not like it’s a small sample size.”

Stotts has tried to spin it forward, saying the team should improve once Nurkic finds his legs and Powell becomes integrated into their system. And he has repeatedly said he likes the direction the team is heading and points to the team’s 112.0 defensive rating since Nurkic and Powell have joined the starting lineup, which ranks 18th during that time frame.

However, the team is 6-6 in that span, and the wins were hardly a who’s-who of formidable teams: Detroit (twice), Oklahoma City, Orlando, Toronto (without Kyle Lowry), and San Antonio by one after trailing by 16 in the third.

Even after the Charlotte loss on Sunday, he said he thinks the team is headed in the right direction.

“Yeah. You know, obviously, Dame didn’t play and Dame is a big part of our team,” Stotts said. “When Dame is healthy (and) I think Nurk is rounding into form, so yeah, I like where we are. We have a tough schedule. No question, there are going to be some ups and downs the rest of the way. But since we’ve added Norman and Nurk to the team I think the last count we are (18th) in defense — that’s going the right direction … Obviously the first quarter of tonight’s game dampers it a bit, but I think overall we are going in the right direction when we have everybody.”

Time will tell, but right now time does not appear to be in Stotts’ favor. The season is getting shorter, and the Blazers’ list of concerns is getting longer.
 
For a statement on the impact a coach can have on the exact same personnel, here you go:

The Atlanta Hawks are 17-6 since changing coaches https://deadspin.com/the-atlanta-hawks-are-17-6-since-changing-coaches-and-h-1846725250

The firing of Lloyd Pierce on the day after Black History Month ended was marred by unfavorable reactions, putting the successor in a difficult spot, even if it was McMillan, who has been coaching in the NBA in some capacity since 1998. Pierce was removed from his position with the Hawks on March 1, where the team sat 14-20 nearly halfway through the season. But since appointing McMillan — who had a career 661-588 NBA head coaching record coming into the season — the team is 17-6. They had even won eight straight immediately after their coaching change and have won 8 of their last 10 heading into tonight’s home game against the Orlando Magic.
Click to expand...
 
GrandpaBlaze said:
For a statement on the impact a coach can have on the exact same personnel, here you go:

The Atlanta Hawks are 17-6 since changing coaches https://deadspin.com/the-atlanta-hawks-are-17-6-since-changing-coaches-and-h-1846725250
Click to expand...

Nate has a proven track record to have success with a young team to take them out of the lottery. He's also won 1 playoff series in 17 season as a head coach.

When he was fired by the Blazers, I didn't think he was the reason we weren't championship contenders.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
So... I'm assuming you weren't a Blazers fan during the McMillan years...
Click to expand...

I've always been a fan of the Blazers. I saw the headline before I realized who was the new coach. Not a Nate fan. Still, goes to show sometimes a change can do good for the same personnel.

I realize Nate doesn't have a good playoff record but I'm just saying, perhaps having a different cook for the same ingredients may result in a better overall concoction.

Gramps...
 
GrandpaBlaze said:
I've always been a fan of the Blazers. I saw the headline before I realized who was the new coach. Not a Nate fan. Still, goes to show sometimes a change can do good for the same personnel.

I realize Nate doesn't have a good playoff record but I'm just saying, perhaps having a different cook for the same ingredients may result in a better overall concoction.

Gramps...
Click to expand...
I've defended Stotts and I still think he has reason to be proud of his record as Blazer coach (because I think we've had seriously deficient rosters and that he has overachieved) but even I am starting to think that it's time for change for change's sake.
 
The historically bad defense alone is enough to warrant a coaching change, however, I don't think our shot selection gets discussed or addressed enough by the media.

Take tonight for example:

CJ and Melo were extremely inefficient on volume shooting (16-44 FG), while the rest of the team was over 50% (26-50 FG).

Robert Covington, who has now increased his average from 3 to 38.5%, has taken just eight shot over the past three games, including a single attempt tonight.

Enes Kanter was a perfect 4-4 from the field as well.

And even Anfernee had it rolling a bit, shooting 4-8.

The lack of distribution of shots is concerning on multiple fronts. First, it puts all of the offensive output on 1-3 players, and I would argue Portland's scorers (aside from Dame) aren't incredibly efficient. Second, it's predictable to defend. And lastly, it can't be fun playing in this system if you're not one of the main options.

Nurk is really the only Blazer who looks to pass-first, and that's on Neil for not diversifying the type of offensive players on the roster. But, it's also on Terry, for not holding players accountable for taking too many shots, and the majority of said shots being absolutely terrible.

The more I watch this team and dissect what's wrong, the less hopeful I get that it can be salvaged without major overhauls.
 
HolyBackboard said:
The historically bad defense alone is enough to warrant a coaching change, however, I don't think our shot selection gets discussed or addressed enough by the media.

Take tonight for example:

CJ and Melo were extremely inefficient on volume shooting (16-44 FG), while the rest of the team was over 50% (26-50 FG).

Robert Covington, who has now increased his average from 3 to 38.5%, has taken just eight shot over the past three games, including a single attempt tonight.

Enes Kanter was a perfect 4-4 from the field as well.

And even Anfernee had it rolling a bit, shooting 4-8.

The lack of distribution of shots is concerning on multiple fronts. First, it puts all of the offensive output on 1-3 players, and I would argue Portland's scorers (aside from Dame) aren't incredibly efficient. Second, it's predictable to defend. And lastly, it can't be fun playing in this system if you're not one of the main options.

Nurk is really the only Blazer who looks to pass-first, and that's on Neil for not diversifying the type of offensive players on the roster. But, it's also on Terry, for not holding players accountable for taking too many shots, and the majority of said shots being absolutely terrible.

The more I watch this team and dissect what's wrong, the less hopeful I get that it can be salvaged without major overhauls.
Click to expand...

our entire offense leans on volume shooting. Dame just masks a lot because of how good he is. I’ve said for years that Stotts should be looking to use CJ as more of a Klay Thompson, where the focus is set shots off ball movement instead of pounding the rock for 90% of the shot clock.

A major overhaul could be what’s needed, but I’d at least try a new coach out first.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
I've defended Stotts and I still think he has reason to be proud of his record as Blazer coach (because I think we've had seriously deficient rosters and that he has overachieved) but even I am starting to think that it's time for change for change's sake.
Click to expand...
The thing is that you're right that he's never had a good enough roster and if it is him (I think he's a contributing factor) then that's Olshey's fault too. Olshey needs to go and then let his replacement fire Stotts and hire the right person to run the team that the replacement builds. I just want Olshey gone. Obviously Stotts has lost this team but I think more obviously Olshey is at fault for the team that has been lost and the guy that's still here that's lost them.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
I've defended Stotts and I still think he has reason to be proud of his record as Blazer coach (because I think we've had seriously deficient rosters and that he has overachieved) but even I am starting to think that it's time for change for change's sake.
Click to expand...

Someone else said it! When I first advocated change for change's sake, everyone was repelled!

After a couple of years, I noted that basketball is show biz entertainment, as in when they cancel a TV show or theater play after a few years, only because it gets boring. You guys stopped objecting, but also didn't agree.

Now, the first one agrees. It takes years to get followers on this board, but eventually you all agree with my compelling pearls of wisdom.
 
jlprk said:
Someone else said it! When I first advocated change for change's sake, everyone was repelled!

After a couple of years, I noted that basketball is show biz entertainment, as in when they cancel a TV show or theater play after a few years, only because it gets boring. You guys stopped objecting, but also didn't agree.

Now, the first one agrees. It takes years to get followers on this board, but eventually you all agree with my compelling pearls of wisdom.
Click to expand...
I was on the fire Stotts after that pelican sweep. As much as I don’t like his system and his way of doing things, he shouldn’t be the only one carrying the brunt of the blame. Neil deserve too, honestly even more than Stotts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top