Is Terry Porter our next coach?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
T

tbfan

New Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
16
Likes
0
Points
1
I see it happening. It just seems so coincidental he moves back to Portland, and becomes involved with the Blazers again. I think Portland fans would embrace him as a coach of the Blazers.
 
Well if nothing else I suspect he'd make Greg a bigger part of the offense ...
 
We'd loose Monty for sure. He almost left this year, didn't he?
 
Buzz Killington said:
We Want JVG.
Click to expand...
Actually, I was not that much of a Van Gundy fan until I listened to him broadcast a couple of our games. He really likes our players and I came away with the opinion that he really understood how to use our guys as well as motivate them. He'd be pretty high on my list if it ever came to that.
 
BBert said:
Actually, I was not that much of a Van Gundy fan until I listened to him broadcast a couple of our games. He really likes our players and I came away with the opinion that he really understood how to use our guys as well as motivate them. He'd be pretty high on my list if it ever came to that.
Click to expand...

He's a lateral move imo. What we would get out of one area, another area would suffer.
 
BBert said:
Actually, I was not that much of a Van Gundy fan until I listened to him broadcast a couple of our games. He really likes our players and I came away with the opinion that he really understood how to use our guys as well as motivate them. He'd be pretty high on my list if it ever came to that.
Click to expand...

Seconded. I think JVG would be an excellent choice ... The problem is though I somehow doubt KP thinks he would be.
 
Not feelin Porter at all. He's a lot like Nate in that he wants his players to play his type of game, rather than molding his coaching to fit the players best.

it's_GO_time said:
If we really want to focus on Oden . . . how about Ewing as coach.
Click to expand...

If???

Even then I'd pick Kevin McFail over Ewing.

But my vote goes to JVG. If not him, then Monty for his familiarity with the team.
 
Nikolokolus said:
What area(s) would that be?
Click to expand...

Nate runs the offense through our guards. I think Jeff would be more apt to run the offense through our bigs. I think Jeff would be stronger defensively, weaker offensively. Where as you can make a case Nate is stronger offensively, weaker defensively. Nate is probably stronger with connecting with our players where Jeff probably won't be as strong.

But if I have to replace Nate McMillan it will be with what I consider a legitimate upgrade. I don't think Jeff is an upgrade. You can make cases that his teams in both New York and Houston were underachievers. Regular season specifically. And the reason why I think they are underachievers is because deep down the players don't like him.
 
Last edited:
KEVIN MCHALE

Just as long as he doesn't have any say about roster moves. Strictly a coach.
 
it's_GO_time said:
If we really want to focus on Oden . . . how about Ewing as coach.
Click to expand...
I don't want the offense to focus on Oden. Just develop and utilize his strengths. I do have confidence (OK, more like blind faith -- OK, more like blind hope) that the coach will do so later, once G.O. has met coach's expectations in other areas?
 
um no chance in hell... only if we are rebuilding so the franchise can put a smiley face on the shit they are putting on the floor.

if we are good... he has no chance
 
What if Monty is our next coach? I don't think he was a Nate hire.
 
why go for young, unproven assistants. we're in a championship window soon, we need championship caliber coaching.
 
Schilly said:
What if Monty is our next coach? I don't think he was a Nate hire.
Click to expand...
Might explain some of the big sales job to keep him from going to greener pastures? :dunno:
 
Buzz Killington said:
why go for young, unproven assistants. we're in a championship window soon, we need championship caliber coaching.
Click to expand...

They could be the answer. But that would be a tough thing to determine. Who is the right choice to lead this team to multiple titles? Trying to find that diamond. What do you look for? How do you find it?
 
RoyIsClutch07 said:
They could be the answer. But that would be a tough thing to determine. Who is the right choice to lead this team to multiple titles? Trying to find that diamond. What do you look for? How do you find it?
Click to expand...

How about you put someone in charge - and continue riding him as long as the team improves consistently from year to year and gets into contention position?

Oh, wait. That would be logical.
 
andalusian said:
How about you put someone in charge - and continue riding him as long as the team improves consistently from year to year and gets into contention position?

Oh, wait. That would be logical.
Click to expand...

I think more logical would be to separate whether the team/record improvement is due to increasing talent or coaching. If the same group of prime players kept improving their record, then you definitely have coaching gold. On the flip side, if you replace a team of scrubs with a team of stars, the improvement probably has nothing to do with coaching.

The cases in between those two extremes are much trickier to analyze, especially as there is some interwovenness (new word) between coaching and better talent, when the players are pre-prime.

But it's certainly not logical to simply say "Record has improved every year, so clearly the coach is doing things right." He may be incidental or even holding the team back from greater success. Those possibilities have to be explored, if one is going to discuss the issue.
 
andalusian said:
How about you put someone in charge - and continue riding him as long as the team improves consistently from year to year and gets into contention position?

Oh, wait. That would be logical.
Click to expand...

If you listen to Kp in the media, I think Nate has his vote of confidence. I think Nate is KP's guy. But, his long term future rests on Greg Oden. How he uses him and how he comes along will determine if Nate is the right guy or not.
 
Minstrel said:
I think more logical would be to separate whether the team/record improvement is due to increasing talent or coaching. If the same group of prime players kept improving their record, then you definitely have coaching gold. On the flip side, if you replace a team of scrubs with a team of stars, the improvement probably has nothing to do with coaching.
Click to expand...

Well, you can not really do this experiment in real life with the ability to go back to the old coach if the replacement one sucks - so that takes it out of "logic" in real-world situations, as far as I am concerned.

What you can do - is look at other variables and look at identical teams in history. I believe BEdge ran a statistical analysis last year about success based on age - and this team is an anomaly. It is an awful lot better than any other young teams in the NBA's history. Given that other than Blake - none of these guys won it all in College - it is pretty clear that they all had to get some kind of coaching. So far, at least as a development coach - Nate and company have proved to be well above average.

So - the next question is - and it is a good one - will he be able to make the transition from development coach to a successful coach of a maturing, talented team? Can he make the transition to being an above average coach for these situations. The truth is - we do not know. Some people think they know - but it's nothing more than an opinion, and not one that seems to really do well when you look at it under statistical evaluation.

Add the fact that Nate, as a coach, had a lot more success than one would expect from a team of misfits like what he had in Seattle - A team with Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis and a whole lot of garbage winning 52 games and making it to the 2nd round of the playoffs - and that he was very successful as an assistant coach of a team of super-stars that emphasized defense (the area he was in charge of) and won it all at the Olympics - and I do not think it would be illogical to give him the time to figure it out with this team he has and see what he can do with them before we call for his replacement.

That very well coached team in Seattle that won 52 games, the year after he left, fell on it's face and won a lot less without him. Hmm...
 
RoyIsClutch07 said:
If you listen to Kp in the media, I think Nate has his vote of confidence. I think Nate is KP's guy. But, his long term future rests on Greg Oden. How he uses him and how he comes along will determine if Nate is the right guy or not.
Click to expand...

I think his long-term future rests on the team's success, not Oden. If somehow Nate fails to connect with Oden (something that I doubt happens) - and yet the team wins it all with Dante Cuningham being the star - Nate will stay here.

It is logical to assume that the biggest chance this team will be a success is if Oden becomes a dominant center. The question, however - is how does he get there - because he is clearly only dominant in short spurts at this point.

As was shown above - Nate has pretty much proved that he is a fantastic development coach, at the worst. So - if he chooses to develop Oden by having him work on Defense mostly right now - again, who are we to argue?
 
Minstrel said:
I think more logical would be to separate whether the team/record improvement is due to increasing talent or coaching. If the same group of prime players kept improving their record, then you definitely have coaching gold. On the flip side, if you replace a team of scrubs with a team of stars, the improvement probably has nothing to do with coaching.

The cases in between those two extremes are much trickier to analyze, especially as there is some interwovenness (new word) between coaching and better talent, when the players are pre-prime.

But it's certainly not logical to simply say "Record has improved every year, so clearly the coach is doing things right." He may be incidental or even holding the team back from greater success. Those possibilities have to be explored, if one is going to discuss the issue.
Click to expand...
Exactamundo. You said it better then I ever could have. Very well said Minstrel.
 
andalusian said:
I think his long-term future rests on the team's success, not Oden. If somehow Nate fails to connect with Oden (something that I doubt happens) - and yet the team wins it all with Dante Cuningham being the star - Nate will stay here.

It is logical to assume that the biggest chance this team will be a success is if Oden becomes a dominant center. The question, however - is how does he get there - because he is clearly only dominant in short spurts at this point.

As was shown above - Nate has pretty much proved that he is a fantastic development coach, at the worst. So - if he chooses to develop Oden by having him work on Defense mostly right now - again, who are we to argue?
Click to expand...

Because I think you are leaving a big portion of his game untapped by not developing him not only on the defensive end but offensive end.

I would be surprised if I was the only one who felt that way. He has a lot more to give. Atleast, I think so. And by not tapping into his game on the offensive end. You are not only do yourself a disservice. But you are doing a disservice to him.
 
Last edited:
andalusian said:
Given that other than Blake - none of these guys won it all in College - it is pretty clear that they all had to get some kind of coaching.
Click to expand...

Shaq, Kobe, Duncan...none of these guys won it all in college. Just saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top