For Everyone that Doesn't Like Nate's Coaching

[PapaG]

For one, I've watched the games, I've watched all but two games this season. I also coach basketball and have worked for a scouting service, so I would like to think I have some knowledge of the game.

Is it fair for me to assume you think Brandon Roy is one of the top 3 players in the NBA? I know I'm jumping to conclusions, but that is the only thing I can come up with, based on your reasoning that Brandon Roy bails us out and make very difficult shots.

Without having any proof, I would guess that we force more 24 second shot clock violations on other teams than we have ourselves. It seems to me that you tend to remember the bad possessions more than the good ones. You should chart the possessions the next game and see how many shots we take with 1 second left on the shot clock, I bet you would be surprised it's only a few (and our opponents is similar).

Repped for bringing some substance.

 

[julius]

exactly how many championships or hell, NBA finals, has a D'antoni team won or played in?

You have to play defense to win titles. D'Antoni teams don't play defense, and therefore, won't *ever* win a title.

And I'm confused, MM bitches about Nate, but want a Van Gundy? And he's even considering the king of the slow-it-down offense, Jeff, as a good replacement?

I'm not saying Nate is 100% the guy, but people seem to either forget that this team is young and is starting 2 rookies, and 3 are getting major minutes on the team. Including one coming off of MF.

But ooh boy, NY scores 5 more points than Portland does.

Oddly enough, they have a worse record.

Why does Orlando have a better record? I don't know, it couldn't be that they're a vet team, could it? It couldn't be that they have players who have, as a starting unit, average more than 3 years in the NBA, right?

 

[Road Blocker]

And I'm confused, MM bitches about Nate, but want a Van Gundy? And he's even considering the king of the slow-it-down offense, Jeff, as a good replacement?

I'm not saying Nate is 100% the guy, but people seem to either forget that this team is young and is starting 2 rookies, and 3 are getting major minutes on the team. Including one coming off of MF.

But ooh boy, NY scores 5 more points than Portland does.

Oddly enough, they have a worse record.


Why does Orlando have a better record? I don't know, it couldn't be that they're a vet team, could it? It couldn't be that they have players who have, as a starting unit, average more than 3 years in the NBA, right?

What if Stan Van Gundy came with Patrick Ewing? You can not argue with the development of Dwight Howard, and the way they utilize his skills, and get him involved in the offense.

I hope Nate can do it, and I don't think he has nearly as much to work with as Stan Van Gundy does right now, considering how inconsistent the young Blazers players have been. However, if management were to go another direction, I think Stan would be a good replacement, and a better one than D'antoni, that is saying that he would actually be available to Portland.

Certainly every coach would not be accessible. If they were, Phil would be the easy and obvious choice.

 

[Tince]

I think Stan would be a good fit here, however, it's premature for multiple reasons.

1) Stan (and Patrick) didn't develop Dwight in 34 games, therefore I can't fault Nate for not being able to do it either. Plus, I do believe Oden and Howard are different players, at different levels of health, etc.

2) The Magic are playing the best basketball in the league right now, so he isn't going anywhere, anytime soon. If he does end up going somewhere, it will be because his team did a total tank job, and at that point, it would raise a lot of red flags for me.

3) Nate isn't going to get fired.

I think your idea of getting a new (different) big man coach for Oden is a great idea, and Ewing would be an excellent fit.

 

[Mediocre Man]

For one, I've watched the games, I've watched all but two games this season. I also coach basketball and have worked for a scouting service, so I would like to think I have some knowledge of the game.

Is it fair for me to assume you think Brandon Roy is one of the top 3 players in the NBA? I know I'm jumping to conclusions, but that is the only thing I can come up with, based on your reasoning that Brandon Roy bails us out and make very difficult shots.

Without having any proof, I would guess that we force more 24 second shot clock violations on other teams than we have ourselves. It seems to me that you tend to remember the bad possessions more than the good ones. You should chart the possessions the next game and see how many shots we take with 1 second left on the shot clock, I bet you would be surprised it's only a few (and our opponents is similar).

I have actually done that for 2 games this season.

1 game we had 2 24 second clock violations and 8 shots within 1-2 seconds on the clock...or forced shots.

The other game we had 2 violations and 7 shots forced with time running out.

I'm not here to argue, or get into a dick size type discussion, but I also coach and think I have some knowledge of the game. I appreciate your point of view, but I disagree with it.

 

[Mediocre Man]

exactly how many championships or hell, NBA finals, has a D'antoni team won or played in?

You have to play defense to win titles. D'Antoni teams don't play defense, and therefore, won't *ever* win a title.

And I'm confused, MM bitches about Nate, but want a Van Gundy? And he's even considering the king of the slow-it-down offense, Jeff, as a good replacement?

I'm not saying Nate is 100% the guy, but people seem to either forget that this team is young and is starting 2 rookies, and 3 are getting major minutes on the team. Including one coming off of MF.

But ooh boy, NY scores 5 more points than Portland does.

Oddly enough, they have a worse record.

Why does Orlando have a better record? I don't know, it couldn't be that they're a vet team, could it? It couldn't be that they have players who have, as a starting unit, average more than 3 years in the NBA, right?

No coach could have a slower offense than last in the league, so any coach that could bring better defense would be an improvement.

 

[julius]

No coach could have a slower offense than last in the league, so any coach that could bring better defense would be an improvement.

Thats debatable.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Thats debatable.

We are last in pace? How is it debatable?

If for example JVG came here to coach and we were still last in pace, but top 10 or so in defense then we would be better right?

 

[julius]

We are last in pace? How is it debatable?

If for example JVG came here to coach and we were still last in pace, but top 10 or so in defense then we would be better right?

Because it doesn't mean we'd have a better record.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Because it doesn't mean we'd have a better record.

I get that there is no way to prove that, but a better defensive team would probably have a win or two more.

 

[julius]

I get that there is no way to prove that, but a better defensive team would probably have a win or two more.

And a team that is allowed to be a little more than 3 rookies getting major minutes and our two best players in only their 3rd years, would probably have 4-6 more wins this year too.

 

[Mediocre Man]

And a team that is allowed to be a little more than 3 rookies getting major minutes and our two best players in only their 3rd years, would probably have 4-6 more wins this year too.

So it's settled.

A Van Gundy for Nate, and trade Travis, filler and Raef for Wallace. Then trade Sergio and Ike for Lee.

A new defensive coach and vets

 

[julius]

So it's settled.

A Van Gundy for Nate, and trade Travis, filler and Raef for Wallace. Then trade Sergio and Ike for Lee.

A new defensive coach and vets

Take out Van Gundy and I'm a go.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Take out Van Gundy and I'm a go.

But then our defense still sucks?

 

[julius]

But then our defense still sucks?

A lot of why our defense sucks is because of the players we have.

Greg is struggling (and getting a lot of BS heaped on him by stupid fans). Blake just isn't that good at it. Sergio is bad, and Travis is..well, Travis.

It's debatable that a new coach would all the sudden improve Sergio, Travis and Blake at defense.

It's easy to blame the coach (as you know). Sometimes it's the players and maybe they aren't nearly as good as people think (or want to assign blame to).

 

[B-Roy]

A lot of why our defense sucks is because of the players we have.

Greg is struggling (and getting a lot of BS heaped on him by stupid fans). Blake just isn't that good at it. Sergio is bad, and Travis is..well, Travis.

It's debatable that a new coach would all the sudden improve Sergio, Travis and Blake at defense.

It's easy to blame the coach (as you know). Sometimes it's the players and maybe they aren't nearly as good as people think (or want to assign blame to).

I really have to disagree. A LOT of it is just defensive schemes, which is something Nate is clearly bad at. Look at Boston, none of their players sans maybe Garnett could really be called a good defensive player until they became Celtics. However, Thibodeau's defensive schemes made them a good defensive team. Guys like Ray Allen, who was never known to be a good defender, had his deficiencies masked because the team played great team defense.

 

[hasoos]

Disasterous? They went .500 didn't they? I don't view that as a disaster.

 

[PapaG]

I really have to disagree. A LOT of it is just defensive schemes, which is something Nate is clearly bad at. Look at Boston, none of their players sans maybe Garnett could really be called a good defensive player until they became Celtics. However, Thibodeau's defensive schemes made them a good defensive team. Guys like Ray Allen, who was never known to be a good defender, had his deficiencies masked because the team played great team defense.

Nate's so terrible at defensive schemes that he was tasked with creating the defensive game plan for the Olympic team.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Nate's so terrible at defensive schemes that he was tasked with creating the defensive game plan for the Olympic team.

Nate's Portland team and his Seattle teams both played poor defense.

My guess is that Nate AND Jim Boeheim AND coach K came up with a defensive scheme.

Boeheim and coach K are both extremely good defensive coaches.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Nate's Portland team and his Seattle teams both played poor defense.

My guess is that Nate AND Jim Boeheim AND coach K came up with a defensive scheme.

Boeheim and coach K are both extremely good defensive coaches.

You make a good guess, but alas an incorrect one. Coach K and Boeheim were both initially opposed to the scheme that Nate devised for defensing pick and rolls and eventually allowed him to implement it. This was discussed in one of Jason Quick's "Quick Chats."

I sometimes wonder if the issue isn't that the schemes are bad, but that they are a bad fit for the personnel? Is it possible they are too complex for young players to grasp when maybe their defensive fundamentals are not sound in other areas or is it that the schemes rely on superior athletes to be effective (like the Olympic squad was)? I admit I don't know.

I agree something isn't working, but it's hard to know where to put the fault: inexperienced players or bad schematically?

 

[B-Roy]

You make a good guess, but alas an incorrect one. Coach K and Boeheim were both initially opposed to the scheme that Nate devised for defensing pick and rolls and eventually allowed him to implement it. This was discussed in one of Jason Quick's "Quick Chats."

I sometimes wonder if the issue isn't that the schemes are bad, but that they are a bad fit for the personnel? Is it possible they are too complex for young players to grasp when maybe their defensive fundamentals are not sound in other areas or is it that the schemes rely on superior athletes to be effective (like the Olympic squad was)? I admit I don't know.

I agree something isn't working, but it's hard to know where to put the fault: inexperienced players or bad schematically?

You saying our players are dumb?

 

[Mediocre Man]

You make a good guess, but alas an incorrect one. Coach K and Boeheim were both initially opposed to the scheme that Nate devised for defensing pick and rolls and eventually allowed him to implement it. This was discussed in one of Jason Quick's "Quick Chats."

I sometimes wonder if the issue isn't that the schemes are bad, but that they are a bad fit for the personnel? Is it possible they are too complex for young players to grasp when maybe their defensive fundamentals are not sound in other areas or is it that the schemes rely on superior athletes to be effective (like the Olympic squad was)? I admit I don't know.

I agree something isn't working, but it's hard to know where to put the fault: inexperienced players or bad schematically?

Having your center guard Chris Paul is not a good defensive scheme EVER, Nor is having your PG guard Shaq

 

[Nikolokolus]

You saying our players are dumb?

Not really, but they are pretty inexperienced on the whole, so break downs are to be expected, and until you've done something a lot and seen a lot and had success at it, rotating properly and executing whatever plan there is on defense is not going to come as second nature for awhile.

Frankly I don't really know where to point the finger, it might be Nate, but I find it hard to believe that the switches on picks are all by design (some probably are), otherwise you'd see Jerryd switching on picks constantly and he doesn't.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Having your center guard Chris Paul is not a good defensive scheme EVER, Nor is having your PG guard Shaq

Agreed, we've seen some brutal switches that make no sense ... I get the feeling that the switching scheme is situational and that the team is not recognizing when and when not to do it, on the other hand it's up to Nate to teach them when and when not to switch.

I just have a hard time reconciling the gulf between the effusive praise that Kobe and Lebron heaped on Nate post Olympics for his defensive schemes and the awful defensive execution we see with the Blazers.

 

[julius]

I just have a hard time reconciling gulf between the effusive praise that Kobe and Lebron heaped on Nate post Olympics for his defensive schemes and the awful defensive execution we see with the Blazers.

I don't. The "redeam team" had a slightly better core of players, of which most were veterans or incredibly better players than our guys.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I don't. The "redeam team" had a slightly better core of players, of which most were veterans or incredibly better players than our guys.

Yeah, maybe it's just that in order to execute Nate's defensive system it needs better athletes? or at the least quicker read and react abilities that only come from playing a lot. Who knows.

 

[Webster's Dictionary]

Disasterous? They went .500 didn't they? I don't view that as a disaster.

The italics were supposed to imply sarcasm.

I think Nate is a good coach for this team, I think he's doing a very good job, I have seen no reason to replace him, and wish him to stay at least 3 more years to see how this "cake" turns out.

This was simply a "what if" thread to find out what people who would rather Nate not be our coach are looking for. I put the whole hypothetical situation at the beginning because I wanted to know what coaches people look at and say, "That's what I want in a coach," regardless of whether they are in any way available.

The list has been pretty short. I don't deny that there are probably coaches out there that could do a better job with this team. I just have a feeling that there isn't a whole lot more that any other coaches could get out of this incredibly young group of players. I really don't see Phil Jackson coming in and making us a championship contender right off the bat. Shoot, he didn't do it with the Lakers and Kobe (granted with probably less talent around him than Roy has now, but still, it's Kobe Bryant) for quite a few years.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I have actually done that for 2 games this season.

1 game we had 2 24 second clock violations and 8 shots within 1-2 seconds on the clock...or forced shots.

The other game we had 2 violations and 7 shots forced with time running out.

I'm not here to argue, or get into a dick size type discussion, but I also coach and think I have some knowledge of the game. I appreciate your point of view, but I disagree with it.

Last night

2 shot clock violations by the Blazers to 0 for the Bucks

7 shots coming within 2 seconds of a violation by the Blazers as well.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Last night

2 shot clock violations by the Blazers to 0 for the Bucks

7 shots coming within 2 seconds of a violation by the Blazers as well.

Clearly the answer is to prise Scott Skiles away from the Bucks. Good post.