Has Nate changed your mind this season?

[TripTango]

It's been a pretty amazing change of style for the Sarge so far this year. What's your take on his ability to lead the team compared to previous seasons?

EDIT: These were supposed to be your poll options... I fail.

1. Nope. Once an ass-clown, always an ass-clown. I've always believed that Nate is over-rated as a coach, and I still haven't seen any reason to change my mind.
2. Yes. I never liked him before, but something is different this year... If he can keep doing what he's been doing, he'll have my support.
3. Yes. I had high hopes when he arrived in Portland, but lost confidence in his ability to take us to the next level over the last few seasons. These past few games have renewed my faith.
4. Nope. I have been a Nate-supporter since the beginning -- all y'all fair-weather fans better sit at the back of the bandwagon!

 

[ABM]

It's been a pretty amazing change of style for the Sarge so far this year. What's your take on his ability to lead the team compared to previous seasons?

It's been quite a circus thus far..

 

[jlprk]

He's not an ass-clown, but he's overrated by Vulcans in Seattle. The rest of the league doesn't overrate him. They know he's alright but not an object of worship.

With the experienced players we now have, any experienced NBA coach would do about as well. Paul Allen stocks the lake, and the fisherman doesn't deserve great praise.

We should change coaches every couple of years until we find a diamond. Rick Adelman was right there.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

A poll without a poll -- that's such an HCP thing to do.

 

[TripTango]

A poll without a poll -- that's such an HCP thing to do.

I know, I know... In my defense, that there is a CRAPPY poll-making interface!

 

[TripTango]

Paul Allen stocks the lake, and the fisherman doesn't deserve great praise.

We should change coaches every couple of years until we find a diamond. Rick Adelman was right there.

But if any coach would do just as well, why bother looking for a diamond?

 

[Ed O]

I think he's an above-average coach, but not a really good one. Nothing I've seen so far this year has changed my mind about him in that respect.

I am not necessarily a fan of up-tempo basketball, but I don't think that he's got a good track record of being consistent with what he's said and what he's allowed his teams to do, tempo-wise... so I'm a BIT surprised that the team has been one of the most up-tempo teams in the league so far. Will it last? I doubt it.

But does it matter, as long as the team keeps winning? Not to me

Ed O.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I guess I'm a mix of 2 and 3. I kind of liked him when they hired him, but his ability to make in-game adjustments or game-to-game adjustments when the playoffs would start left me a little cold the last couple of years. I'm happy the team is finally looking committed to getting easy buckets, but I'll reserve final judgment until I see what he's able to do in the playoffs.

 

[RoyToy]

Once an ass clown, always an ass clown

 

[SnakeOiler]

Ass-clown = awesome

 

[HomerLovesKoolAid]

I've always been a Nate supporter.

I think he tries hard to be an even-keeled guy, which is a good and bad thing for the team. I also think he is a slow learner in some ways, but will get there eventually, and coaching is like his life and his playing career in a lot of ways. He has to work really hard at it, is not the most talented but will never give up.

You have to respect him.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think he's most effective when the team's decimated and he gets the "most" out of guys like Pendergraph. Or when he can give the ball to All-Star Roy and go 1v5. He's a good motivator, and the type of tactician where he wants a high "floor", even if that means the ceiling won't get out of the first round. Limit turnovers, attempt to play tough D, make your jumpers. We've seen how that works over the last few years

What this reveals to me is that all of the people who've been saying "we don't have the shooters to play slow-mo-ball against good teams!" and have been begging to run a bit and get some easy points are well on their way to being validated in a big way. I would immediately give Nate props here for changing to something that could work better, but I don't know wth happened in LAC where he dialed it back to slow-mo ball again.

 

[<-=*PdX*=->]

I'll take #2 for lack of a better answer. What I am truly impressed with is the fact that he IS letting the team run and turn the ball over. It shows that he has confidence in this team. I like that a lot. I really think, while he was great and I love/ed him, Roy was the real "problem" and not Nate. Not saying Roy was a problem, just that Nate either geared the offense to Roy or purely just let Roy take over the offense period. Maybe that is just my observation, but think back to last year when Roy was out and Aldridge was putting up major numbers and the team was still winning and playing real exciting ball. Then Roy comes back and everyone regressed.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I am number 2 all the way. Never been a Nate supporter....obviously, but if we continue playing this style and improve our offensive sets I have no problem with him. He seems like a great person, just a bad head coach. I still think he is extremely over rated