Is 11/27/09 the day Nate lost his team?

[Kaydow]

Post game interview last night - Nate calls out Brandon & Lamarcus. He says that they need to get more effort and leadership from those two in particular. Then he talks about a lack of effort, and says that the team goes as their leaders go.

Later on Brandon is interviewed. He's asked about the perceived "lack of effort" and he says it just looks that way. He said guys are not sure what their role is, whether they should be shooting more/less, and where the team wants to go in critical situations offensively. So that leads to confusion and . . . a perceived lack of effort. He goes on to say the team is searching for it's identity.

Sounds like you have the coach pinning this loss on his (star) players, and the star player insinuating the team is confused (certainly a pot shot at the coach)

Tonight's game at Utah could go a long way in answering this question. If last night was an anomaly then I suspect we'll see their best effort tonight (not necessarily a win, but guys busting their butts) If the team comes out flat and uninspired tonight . . . well, you know what that means.

 

[Ghost Pepper]

Nate's iron clad substitutions and lack of being able to coach an offense of any kind are the reason this team loses! It's painful with the amount of talent that we have, " A PROBLEM MOST COACHES WOULD LIVE TO HAVE!" that Nate has found a way to fail with it.


The painful truth has been for years..... Nate is not the right coach!

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

I was going to ask a similar question, but since I didn't actually see the game last night, I figured I shouldn't. From everything I have been reading though, it sounds like it.

 

[Public Defender]

You're right - those answers seem at odds with each other, except I think they're simply looking at different "frames" as they say in the political world. I think Nate was talking about defense, and Roy was certainly talking about the offense. As Michael Holton rightly pointed out when the game was over - the Blazers scored 96 points, and that should be enough to win a game. Giving up 106 points was the problem.

I don't know what questions Nate was answering with his comments, but I think the bottom line is that the Blazers needed to play better defense to win that game. Roy, it seems to me, was making excuses about less-than-stellar execution on the offensive end. But that wasn't the difference in the game.

And if this is the game when Nate loses the team, then I vastly underestimated the bond between Roy and McMillan which has been talked up in The O for years.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Nate lost the team weeks ago. You could see it in the way they flamed out down the stretch of the Denver and (first) Atlanta loss. A year ago, the Blazers would have won both those games.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

IMO, Nate's strongest asset as a coach is to motivate the players and have them believing in the system. If he loses the players in this department, he loses the primary reason he is the Blazer coach.

I should add that I don't think the number one team in defense is a sign players have given up on the coach.

 

[hasoos]

I agree with Nate. Last nights loss purely came down to effort. At one point last night the Blazers were being outrebounded by almost 20 rebounds. They weren't getting back on D. All those things point to effort. Effort is guided by leadership, both the captains, and the coach.

 

[THE HCP]

IMO, Nate's strongest asset as a coach is to motivate the players and have them believing in the system. If he loses the players in this department, he loses the primary reason he is the Blazer coach.

I should add that I don't think the number one team in defense is a sign players have given up on the coach.

Well said.

 

[roydezlaw]

I think Nate lost the team one week ago when he gave into Roy and put Miller on the second unit. It was ridiculous to play Blake and Miller together but to not allow Miller to have the reins with Martell in the starting lineup was stupid and I'm guessing it was noticed by the rest of the team.

 

[Kaydow]

Well said.

What do you think HCP? From the outside it looks like we have some unhappy campers, including Roy. Is this just a funk? Or is it more than that?

 

[hasoos]

What do you think HCP? From the outside it looks like we have some unhappy campers, including Roy. Is this just a funk? Or is it more than that?

If HCP tells you, he will have to kill you. He is sworn to secrecy!

 

[Kaydow]

If HCP tells you, he will have to kill you. He is sworn to secrecy!

I know . . . just thought I'd throw the bait out there.

 

[mgb]

It was obviously effort in the first half. They came out probably looking ahead to the Utah game thinking they could just go half ass agasint the Grizz and got their butts handed to them. The second half they gave the effort, but they had dug to deep of a hole. It's not really that complicated.

 

[1 Eye Jack]

What coaches are out there that would be an upgrade? I'm all for changing if we are guaranteed to get an upgrade at coach. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing Hubie Brown work with this young team for a few years.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

It was obviously effort in the first half. They came out probably looking ahead to the Utah game thinking they could just go half ass agasint the Grizz and got their butts handed to them. The second half they gave the effort, but they had dug to deep of a hole. It's not really that complicated.

I agree with this and have another crazy theory to add:

is it possible last night was just a thanksgiving hangover. You are home, you stuff yourself with all kinds of starchy food while spending time with family and friends. Doesn't sound like the type of environment that would generate a lot of effort the next day.

Meanwhile Memphis is on the road, young bonding and ready to play ball from the opening tip.

I know they are all professionals and that really shouldn't be an excuse . . . but I think it is posible the team was in a thanksgiving afterglow and didn't click on into basketball mode until the second half.

 

[Kaydow]

It was obviously effort in the first half. They came out probably looking ahead to the Utah game thinking they could just go half ass agasint the Grizz and got their butts handed to them. The second half they gave the effort, but they had dug to deep of a hole. It's not really that complicated.

You're right - it's just surprising. Forget Memphis' record, with Gasol, Gay, Mayo, & Z-Bo - those guys are quality players, especially offensively. You can't sleep through a game with them and expect to win. Now, I understand looking at NJ's line-up the other night and mailing it in. But Memphis has some guys who can fill it up. I actually thought at the beginning of the year that they would be in the hunt for a playoff spot. They aren't consistent, but on any given night they can put it on you.

I hope our guys circled January 5th, 2010 on their calendars - the next time Memphis comes to town. We owe them one.

 

[RoyIsClutch07]

Based on the other two results this week. I'm willing to put this one on tryptophan, big families, big holidays and being at home.

Even if they lose tonight. This team will respond on monday. And no, I don't think that is a sign the team has given up on Nate once they do. This team will do enough all year long for Nate to keep his job. Whether if it's deserved or not..

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Nate won't be fired during the season; he took the "one year at a time" contract specifically to prevent this. At the end of this season, if KP and the players don't think he's still the coach for this team, they simply won't re-sign him. But it gives everyone an out.

So we should probably just ride the season out, and hope that the outcome we want (whether that is Nate Stays or Nate Goes) happens over the summer.

 

[Boob-No-More]

This team will do enough all year long for Nate to keep his job. Whether if it's deserved or not.

Good enough simple isn't good enough any more. This team has too much talent and the expectations are too high to accept mediocrity from anyone - including the coach.

Nate pissed away the preseason by farting around with line-ups he had no intention of using during the regular season. And then his brilliant solution is to piss away the easy early season schedule with a ridiculous 3 guard line-up that had 40% of the starting line-up, including his best player, playing out of position.

The Blazers have had an EXTREMELY easy schedule so far. They should be the ones pulling away from the Nuggets right now, not the other way around. Yeah, they have a decent record, but they continue to lose games they shouldn't - and after training camp, 8 preseason games and 18 regular season games, players still don't know their rolls on this team. It's time to put the egos aside, put your best five players out there and let them play. How else do you expect them to learn to play together? The current approach of avoiding starting Miller and Roy together isn't helping. Its making things worse.

BNM

 

[RoyIsClutch07]

Good enough simple isn't good enough any more. This team has too much talent and the expectations are too high to accept mediocrity from anyone - including the coach.
BNM

But I'm afraid that is where this year is headed. Just good enough. Just good enough to make the playoffs. This team doesn't have enough about them to be anymore than that. Atleast right now. That could change. But I kind of doubt it. And yes, that is really disturbing to me. And should be disturbing to everyone.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I think we'll have a better idea of whether or not this team has tuned Nate out at the end of December. We go from one of the easiest schedules in the league to one of the hardest, there's the potential for real adversity and things unraveling. If they hold together and can start to find their rhythm and get everybody clicking then I think Nate earns the right to keep his job, if they falter and collapse I think there's a chance for some real cracks to start showing in this team, and the easiest (though not usually all that effective) method of "fixing" such a problem is to give the coach the axe and see if somebody else can put it back together.

Nate's frustrating the hell out of me with his use/mis-use of Oden and Miller, but KP frustrates me even more for not consolidating this roster and starting the process of surrounding his core with complimentary players (ps. if you're going to sign a starting point guard and pay him starting point guard money, but refuse to trade your now superfluous "career year," average at best, point guard to make it clear what your vision is for the team then expect muddled roles and substitutions)

 

[barfo]

Nate's frustrating the hell out of me with his use/mis-use of Oden and Miller, but KP frustrates me even more for not consolidating this roster and starting the process of surrounding his core with complimentary players (ps. if you're going to sign a starting point guard and pay him starting point guard money, but refuse to trade your now superfluous "career year," average at best, point guard to make it clear what your vision is for the team then expect muddled roles and substitutions)

I don't think it should be necessary to trade Blake to get him out of the starting spot. Joel, for example, was a starter in the past and now isn't. Blake would make a perfectly ok backup PG.

barfo

 

[Kaydow]

I think we'll have a better idea of whether or not this team has tuned Nate out at the end of December. We go from one of the easiest schedules in the league to one of the hardest, there's the potential for real adversity and things unraveling. If they hold together and can start to find their rhythm and get everybody clicking then I think Nate earns the right to keep his job, if they falter and collapse I think there's a chance for some real cracks to start showing in this team, and the easiest (though not usually all that effective) method of "fixing" such a problem is to give the coach the axe and see if somebody else can put it back together.

Nate's frustrating the hell out of me with his use/mis-use of Oden and Miller, but KP frustrates me even more for not consolidating this roster and starting the process of surrounding his core with complimentary players (ps. if you're going to sign a starting point guard and pay him starting point guard money, but refuse to trade your now superfluous "career year," average at best, point guard to make it clear what your vision is for the team then expect muddled roles and substitutions)

That is the frustrating part for me too. You know that KP has a built in excuse if the team falters this season - Batum and Outlaw are out. He'll argue those guys are invaluable cogs, and that with them in the line-up the Blazers are a different team.

 

[Ed O]

I don't think it should be necessary to trade Blake to get him out of the starting spot. Joel, for example, was a starter in the past and now isn't. Blake would make a perfectly ok backup PG.

Agreed. But if Nate won't put him there...

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

Agreed. But if Nate won't put him there...

Ed O.

Yep... exactly. And I guess maybe it is fair to blame KP for this situation, in the sense that he knows the nature of Nate's nonsensical need to start Blake, so he should modify his strategy accordingly. But it probably isn't fair to blame KP more than Nate.

barfo

 

[Nikolokolus]

I don't think it should be necessary to trade Blake to get him out of the starting spot. Joel, for example, was a starter in the past and now isn't. Blake would make a perfectly ok backup PG.

barfo

If Blake was actually the backup I'd have far fewer issues with him being on the roster (even though I think his minutes might be better spent on Jerryd; seeing if he's actually shown enough improvement from last year to be either a long term solution at the position or whether they need to cut bait).

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Blake's ideal role with the team we have now would be the guy to come in for maybe a few minutes a game if the team isn't hitting anything from long range to see if he has it that night. He really doesn't contribute much beyond his occasional hot shooting, and the occasional go of the patented Nate S word.

 

[MARIS61]

Miller doesn't fit, will never fit longterm, and is the only problem with the team.

That means it's KP's fault, 'cause you can't blame Miller for being himself and even I saw he wouldn't fit last year when people were mentioning him.

This has little to do with Nate, it's a personnel issue.

 

[Uther TheGardener]

wrong....the team has given up on nate.

 

[Blazer Freak]

Miller doesn't fit, will never fit longterm, and is the only problem with the team.

That means it's KP's fault, 'cause you can't blame Miller for being himself and even I saw he wouldn't fit last year when people were mentioning him.

This has little to do with Nate, it's a personnel issue.

So Andre is the reason LA puts out no effort on d, if you disagree with that check his d on boozer tonight, or roys lack of d, you are crazy. Miller would fit but Roy and Nate won't give him the oppourtunity to play with just him. Blake contributes nothing to the team, and continues to play starter minutes. His horrid play and Nates shitty coaching are what's wrong with the team.