I like Canales a lot. Think he'll be a good coach.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
I'm quite surprised on how he's handling close games. He actually calls good time outs and doesn't look like he panics. I really thought he would be in over his head.
 
If Canales was hired to tank, he should be fired, because the Blazers have a better record (admittedly small sample) with him than with McMillan.
 
crandc said:
If Canales was hired to tank, he should be fired, because the Blazers have a better record (admittedly small sample) with him than with McMillan.
Click to expand...

I don't think management wanted to tank. I think they wanted the fans to have something to cheer for. No one would really cheer for the lotto.
 
crandc said:
If Canales was hired to tank, he should be fired, because the Blazers have a better record (admittedly small sample) with him than with McMillan.
Click to expand...

Not just better this season (6-6 vs. 20-23) but better total record with the Blazers (6-6 vs. 266-269). That's right. In six and a half seasons in Portland, Nate McMillan had a losing record as the Trail Blazers head coach.

But hey, he was a nice guy and a sharp dresser...

BNM
 
Boob-No-More said:
Not just better this season (6-6 vs. 20-23) but better total record with the Blazers (6-6 vs. 266-269). That's right. In six and a half seasons in Portland, Nate McMillan had a losing record as the Trail Blazers head coach.

But hey, he was a nice guy and a sharp dresser...

BNM
Click to expand...

Fuck wins and losses, dude! That's inconsequential in the grand scheme of 2nd half adjustments!!!
 
MickZagger said:
Fuck wins and losses, dude! That's inconsequential in the grand scheme of 2nd half adjustments!!!
Click to expand...

OK, nice guy, sharp dresser and led the league in 2nd half point differential in spite of a losing record.

BNM
 
A winning record as a head coach despite running D-League talent at times and being comptetive in nearly every game.

I rest my case.
 
Boob-No-More said:
Not just better this season (6-6 vs. 20-23) but better total record with the Blazers (6-6 vs. 266-269). That's right. In six and a half seasons in Portland, Nate McMillan had a losing record as the Trail Blazers head coach.

But hey, he was a nice guy and a sharp dresser...

BNM
Click to expand...

In fairness, when Nate arrived the team was coming off a year where they had the worst record in the league. Not winning at first was excusable. Never winning a playoff series, not so much. This season, not at all.

And really, it would only be a fair comparison if Canales coached for 5 years, which I doubt will happen.
 
crandc said:
In fairness, when Nate arrived the team was coming off a year where they had the worst record in the league. Not winning at first was excusable. Never winning a playoff series, not so much. This season, not at all.

And really, it would only be a fair comparison if Canales coached for 5 years, which I doubt will happen.
Click to expand...

Actually, Nate coached them to the worst record in the league. I actually did a talent comparison from our current team to that team that only won 27 games. The stats are very similar actually. In fact, the team had very similar talent. I think Nate proven that he can only win when he has a superstar wing. The only times he had winning records is when he had either B-Roy or Ray Allen on his team.

I think Nate should look for a team with a superstar wing. If he can't find one, then he will never win.
 
magnifier661 said:
Actually, Nate coached them to the worst record in the league. I actually did a talent comparison from our current team to that team that only won 27 games. The stats are very similar actually. In fact, the team had very similar talent. I think Nate proven that he can only win when he has a superstar wing. The only times he had winning records is when he had either B-Roy or Ray Allen on his team.

I think Nate should look for a team with a superstar wing. If he can't find one, then he will never win.
Click to expand...

Who was Nate's superstar wing in Seattle? Ray Allen isn't exactly a wing who consistently creates his own offense. And how did he manage to coach a team to 48 wins last year with an ineffective Brandon Roy?

Or, can we also say that Canales is a .500 coach with an All-Star and All-NBA front court player? Comparing Canales to any NBA coach at this point is not only unfair to Canales, but it smacks of desperation.
 
PapaG said:
Who was Nate's superstar wing in Seattle? Ray Allen isn't exactly a wing who consistently creates his own offense. And how did he manage to coach a team to 48 wins last year with an ineffective Brandon Roy?

Or, can we also say that Canales is a .500 coach with and All-Star and All-NBA front court player?
Click to expand...

Last year's difference was Andre Miller. He played out of his mind last season and worked perfectly with Aldridge. Also, Miller didn't listen to Nate like the other PGs and called his own plays a lot of times.

Oh and Ray Allen was absolutely a superstar wing in Seattle.
 
Damn 'AV guys' thinking they can be competent coaches and stuff...

SMH
 
magnifier661 said:
Last year's difference was Andre Miller. He played out of his mind last season and worked perfectly with Aldridge. Also, Miller didn't listen to Nate like the other PGs and called his own plays a lot of times.
Click to expand...

So the Blazers made the playoffs in spite of Nate last year. Yet this year, Denver is barely hanging on to a playoff spot, yet George Karl plays Miller off of the bench.

Got it.

Oh and Ray Allen was absolutely a superstar wing in Seattle.
Click to expand...

Ray Allen's game and Brandon Roy's game aren't even close to being the same. I feel like you're being a bit vague with your "superstar" wing comments. I also wonder what coach has been successful without a "superstar wing". I suppose the Spurs, but Ginobli has made some All-Star games.

I think having a "superstar" is a rarity, but if you think Roy and Ray Allen are superstars, then I guess we have a different definition of that term.
 
"superstar" isnt clearly defined, i would define it as someone who is on alot of national commercials
 
Ray Allen is more of a superstar than Roy was. And for brainiac, he had a movie and was in commercials. So I guess he was a superstar.

And miller is coming off the bench in Denver. So his contribution to Denver isn't the same as it was in Portland. And miller had to learn a new playbook. I bet our team would have been much better this season if we didn't trade miller for Felton.
 
magnifier661 said:
Ray Allen is more of a superstar than Roy was.
Click to expand...

Allen had two seasons of 70+ games with a PER over 22, and only one was in Seattle. Ginobli had a higher PER that year. That's not a "superstar", IMO.
 
PapaG said:
...except that Ray Allen has never been a 'superstar' on the court IMO
Click to expand...

you forgot that part

i dont think so either btw, although 10x all star helps his case a lil
 
MickZagger said:
25ppg scorer for a few years in Seattle would suggest superstar type scoring.
Click to expand...

Nate wasn't his coach those years, the teams were worse than when Nate was his coach, even though Allen scored more. 20 games worse the season after Nate left. Hmm...
 
PapaG said:
Nate wasn't his coach those years, the teams were worse than when Nate was his coach, even though Allen scored more. 20 games worse the season after Nate left. Hmm...
Click to expand...

It probably had everything to do with Nate leaving...
 
nate let everybody jack up all those worthless 3pointers, filthy stat padders
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top