Is it now a general concensus around here....

[MickZagger]

I've always thought coaching was overrated. They don't do that much.

I think in general its overrated as well. But, I think ideas can get stale and sitting on a coach who is getting the status quo out of a team isn't a great idea.

 

[OddEnormous]

but I'd rather have an "interchangeable" coach on a series of one-year deals.

This made my brain hurt.

You'd rather keep a coach who's easy to get rid of, but you can't get rid of because then you don't have the coach who's easy to get rid of.

 

[Minstrel]

This made my brain hurt.

You'd rather keep a coach who's easy to get rid of, but you can't get rid of because then you don't have the coach who's easy to get rid of.

If the Blazers are going to have a coach who makes no difference one way or the other, I'd rather he be one the team can ditch at a moment's notice rather than one the team is locked into for several years. As I said in a previous post, I'd happily replace McMillan with a coach who I feel actually is a difference-maker. I simply don't have nearly as negative a view of McMillan, relative to the rest of the league, as you do, so I don't see replacing him as an urgent issue. Until someone clearly better comes along, I prefer McMillan's easily-ditched mediocrity to another coach's contractually-locked-in mediocrity.

 

[OddEnormous]

If the Blazers are going to have a coach who makes no difference one way or the other, I'd rather he be one the team can ditch at a moment's notice rather than one the team is locked into for several years. As I said in a previous post, I'd happily replace McMillan with a coach who I feel actually is a difference-maker. I simply don't have nearly as negative a view of McMillan, relative to the rest of the league, as you do, so I don't see replacing him as an urgent issue. Until someone clearly better comes along, I prefer McMillan's easily-ditched mediocrity to another coach's contractually-locked-in mediocrity.

Dear lord what has this franchise done to you?

You are still essentially saying that you don't want to fire him cause he's easy to fire. This is the single worst reason I've ever heard to keep a coach around. Coming from you it's even more baffling... and to be frank, sad.

At the every least you could have lied to me and said you think Nate is still the right guy.

I'd rather go the absolute shit route as soon as possible and try and get lucky again. Middling around for the next 5 years beating only the likes of, Sacto, Milwaukee and phx on cold tuesday nights only to slowly sink into the shit anyway is so fucking pointless it makes my head hurt.

Being shit does not kill franchises, being mediocre does. It's just a delay of the inevitable.

 

[Natebishop3]

Dear lord what has this franchise done to you?

You are still essentially saying that you don't want to fire him cause he's easy to fire. This is the single worst reason I've ever heard to keep a coach around. Coming from you it's even more baffling... and to be frank, sad.

At the every least you could have lied to me and said you think Nate is still the right guy.

I'd rather go the absolute shit route as soon as possible and try and get lucky again. Middling around for the next 5 years beating only the likes of, Sacto, Milwaukee and phx on cold tuesday nights only to slowly sink into the shit anyway is so fucking pointless it makes my head hurt.

Being shit does not kill franchises, being mediocre does. It's just a delay of the inevitable.

I'm not a Nate fan, but who else would you hire at this point? There aren't a lot of great options out there.... how else would you explain Doug Collins still getting work?

 

[Nate Dogg]

that this team was much better last year. They were 12-5 at this same time last year (11/30). Blazers are 5-9 in the month of November. Nate's offensive flow sucks.

 

[DeanMoriarty]

Honestly, we couldn't do much better without Nate.

If he left, he'd get picked up by the Miami Heat, who'll want to recreate Team USA if given the opportunity. Would Blazer fans want to see that? Nate and the Heat succeeding while the struggling Blazers have no replacement coach?

Nate might not be great but there's really no one else to replace him. And if we were to fire him, this team would be lost in mediocrity for the next few years.

Right now, the only thing I would truly see as a hindrance to this team is the injuries.

 

[Minstrel]

Dear lord what has this franchise done to you?

You are still essentially saying that you don't want to fire him cause he's easy to fire. This is the single worst reason I've ever heard to keep a coach around. Coming from you it's even more baffling... and to be frank, sad.

Let me try to clairfy my position, in case anything was unclear. My view is that outside of a few (as in, two or three) coaches, head coaches don't make a significant difference. McMillan is as good (or as bad) as anyone outside of a very few coaches. So if Portland can't get one of those very few difference-makers, yes, I'd prefer one of the 95% of coaches that is easy to fire on the off-chance that one those very few difference-makers becomes available next year or the year after.

Essentially, I don't think head coach matters usually. When that rare head coach comes along who matters, I'd rather Portland's current irrelevant coach be one who's easy to get rid of.

If that's all clear to you and you feel that that's sad, I'm comfortable with that. I don't think McMillan's "the guy." Unless Portland gets someone like Phil Jackson or Rick Adelman, there is no head coach who I'd consider "the guy." So "easy to fire" breaks the tie among irrelevant coaches to me.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

Honestly, we couldn't do much better without Nate.

If he left, he'd get picked up by the Miami Heat, who'll want to recreate Team USA if given the opportunity. Would Blazer fans want to see that? Nate and the Heat succeeding while the struggling Blazers have no replacement coach?

Nate might not be great but there's really no one else to replace him. And if we were to fire him, this team would be lost in mediocrity for the next few years.

Right now, the only thing I would truly see as a hindrance to this team is the injuries.

We most likely already are, even with Nate on board.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I've always thought coaching was overrated. They don't do that much.

Like CEOs.

Actually, that's true. There's about one or two of any of them (Phil Jackson, Jose Mourinho, et. al.) that make a difference, and the rest are about interchangeable. It's amazing how many people still claim that Jackson's victories are all because of his players.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Like CEOs.

Actually, that's true. There's about one or two of any of them (Phil Jackson, Jose Mourinho, et. al.) that make a difference, and the rest are about interchangeable. It's amazing how many people still claim that Jackson's victories are all because of his players.

He's a great coach with a great system behind him... but I haven't seen him win with anything less than top-flight talent, either.

 

[Natebishop3]

Honestly, we couldn't do much better without Nate.

If he left, he'd get picked up by the Miami Heat, who'll want to recreate Team USA if given the opportunity. Would Blazer fans want to see that? Nate and the Heat succeeding while the struggling Blazers have no replacement coach?

Nate might not be great but there's really no one else to replace him. And if we were to fire him, this team would be lost in mediocrity for the next few years.

Right now, the only thing I would truly see as a hindrance to this team is the injuries.

If they wanted to recreate the Redeem Team, they would hire Nate as an Asst Coach and bring in Coach K.

 

[OddEnormous]

I can't believe the shit I read on this board. I really can't.

"Coaches don't actually do that much except for (insert list of all the coaches who win championships)"

I mean, fuck me sideways.

 

[hasoos]

Don't even expect a turnaround even if Nate is fired. This team does not have what it takes to operate at a competitive level at this time.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Don't even expect a turnaround even if Nate is fired. This team does not have what it takes to operate at a competitive level at this time.

Nope, but that's usually not why teams fire coaches. You would fire him now because it allows whatever interim coach that succeeds him to shake up the style and/or rotation unfettered by past expectations. Let's face it, Nate has been here long enough that he's established relationships with his players that would make it difficult if not impossible to tear down and re-establish roles and expectations (for instance say moving Roy to the bench). And really it gives management more time to look for an eventual replacement.

At this point it won't help, but it probably won't hurt either.

 

[Draco]

I don't think Nate is a great coach but he isn't terrible either. Cheeks was terrible. The team is not a high priority desitnation so I believe they would struggle to attrack the best coaches. Therfore as long as the players are still listening to Nate (which I belive they are) then I'm for sticking with him.

Losing sucks and we all want to change something but sometimes making a change based off emotions can be a big mistake.

 

[Blazinaway]

Don't even expect a turnaround even if Nate is fired. This team does not have what it takes to operate at a competitive level at this time.

I thought the team was competitive those games without Roy, maybe that was a fluke but maybe not, we played hard a pretty well and IMO more as a team. I could easily support that team, if this continues it's going to turn a lot of folks off. I will not quit on them but something has to give.