Make or break for Nate?

[Natebishop3]

I really think this is a make or break for Nate. I know he got the extension, but he shouldn't be out-coached in this series. We match up very well with Dallas, we have a mostly healthy roster, and we're playing well. If he gets out-coached in this one, I will pretty much give up on the guy.

 

[KingSpeed]

I agree. He got punched by the other coach the last two years. If we get blown out on our floor again, it's time to bring in someone else.

 

[Natebishop3]

I agree. He got punched by the other coach the last two years. If we get blown out on our floor again, it's time to bring in someone else.

But what does the team do... if we get swept and embarrassed, do they give Nate another year? Do they ride out the extension?

 

[mgb]

Ok, what are you guys saying? If we get swept or lose in 5 time for a new coach? If we take it to at least 6 or 7 happy with Nate? Winning the series ecstatic with Nate?

 

[Natebishop3]

Ok, what are you guys saying? If we get swept or lose in 5 time for a new coach? If we take it to at least 6 or 7 happy with Nate? Winning the series ecstatic with Nate?

Like I said, it depends a lot on how the series goes. What adjustments are made. I suspect games 3 and 4 will be different from games 1 and 2. Someone will make adjustments based on how the series is panning out. Will Nate finally demonstrate an ability to make adjustments? He didn't do a very good job against Phoenix last year. I think he's done a great job with the team this season, but it doesn't mean a damn thing if we keep getting smacked in the playoffs.

So to clarify, if we're:

Swept = REALLY not happy

Lose in 5 = Not happy

Lose in 6 or 7 = Not happy we lost, but obviously we put up a fight.

Win = Happy

I just think we're beyond the point of being happy over moral victories. Pushing a team to six or seven games doesn't mean anything. But like I said, it really depends on Nate's performance overall. How he makes adjustments, what his rotation looks like, and how his overall game plan pays off.

 

[Tince]

If we win, a lot of people will say its because we were better or because of the great play of a certain player. If we lose, it will be Nate's fault. That's just the way a lot of fans see the game.

I think Carlise is a great X's and O's coach and I expect him to give Nate problems. Likewise, I expect Nate to make a few adjustments that give RC trouble. I think this series will come down to players executing game plans, not the ability of either coach.

Regardless, even if we lose thie first 4 games by an average of 40 points, Nate's coming back next year. The Blazers just a few weeks ago used a large body of work to determine that they wanted him back and I can't see situation where they let 4 games change their mind.

 

[Tince]

Swept = REALLY not happy

Lose in 5 = Not happy

Lose in 6 or 7 = Not happy we lost, but obviously we put up a fight.

Win = Happy

I just think we're beyond the point of being happy over moral victories. Pushing a team to six or seven games doesn't mean anything. But like I said, it really depends on Nate's performance overall. How he makes adjustments, what his rotation looks like, and how his overall game plan pays off.

While I don't disagree with you, I think you've came up with a scenario where you're more likely to be unhappy than happy.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Like I said, it depends a lot on how the series goes. What adjustments are made. I suspect games 3 and 4 will be different from games 1 and 2. Someone will make adjustments based on how the series is panning out. Will Nate finally demonstrate an ability to make adjustments? He didn't do a very good job against Phoenix last year. I think he's done a great job with the team this season, but it doesn't mean a damn thing if we keep getting smacked in the playoffs.

So to clarify, if we're:

Swept = REALLY not happy

Lose in 5 = Not happy

Lose in 6 or 7 = Not happy we lost, but obviously we put up a fight.

Win = Happy

I just think we're beyond the point of being happy over moral victories. Pushing a team to six or seven games doesn't mean anything. But like I said, it really depends on Nate's performance overall. How he makes adjustments, what his rotation looks like, and how his overall game plan pays off.

So to clarify if If Dirk shoots free throws down the stretch (whether he was fouled or not) and the Portland players miss big shots in crunch time, all contributing to a Dallas sweep, Nate need to go?

It will be interesting to see if you guys notice all the adjustments he makes in a game. (Other than a rotation change)

 

[STOMP]

I think Carlise is a great X's and O's coach and I expect him to give Nate problems. Likewise, I expect Nate to make a few adjustments that give RC trouble. I think this series will come down to players executing game plans, not the ability of either coach.

Regardless, even if we lose thie first 4 games by an average of 40 points, Nate's coming back next year. The Blazers just a few weeks ago used a large body of work to determine that they wanted him back and I can't see situation where they let 4 games change their mind.

this

I'd put the respective coaches well down on the heirachy of what will likely determine the series. Portland probably has the better overall talent but Dallas has home court. Portland also has a playoff history of being hosed by the officials like only an elite few (see the Anaheim Royals). Hopefully Stern isn't so dreading seeing his Lakers boo'd mericilessly in round 2 that he puts out yet another hit on the Blazers.

I especially like the matchups when they play LA Wallace and Batum in the frontcourt together. Any of those 3 players can guard Dirk at least somewhat but how does Dallas match up especially on Wallace? To my thinking, Marion pretty much has to draw the primary guard as he's the only one on their roster with the size and athleticism to stay with him. So then do they go big with Chandler on LA and have Dirk run ragged after Nicolas or have him on LA and have one of their little sisters of the poor backup wings on NB?

Portland also has size advantages in their backcourt both in starters and off the bench. Dallas of course has some great outside shooters (especially Terry) but Kidd really took a step back this year from his past couple seasons. Hopefully we get to see the players decide matters and aren't subjected to the Mav's collection of finesse players parading to the line on ticky tacks.

STOMP

 

[yenniedn]

So to clarify, if we're:

Swept = REALLY not happy

Lose in 5 = Not happy

Lose in 6 or 7 = Not happy we lost, but obviously we put up a fight.

Win = Happy

Good, concise breakdown of the situation - but can further clarify how you'd feel if:

We win in 7 =
We win in 6 =
We win in 5 =
We win in 4 =
We win in 3 =

???

 

[BrianFromWA]

I don't think the playoffs will have an effect on Nate being here next year or not. They may increase or decrease the temperature of his seat whenever the games start up post-lockout, but I think he'll be here.

Whether or not you think he deserves it, I think PA and the front office have decided that he's done a pretty good job with the injuries this year and incorporating Wallace and the young guys in to the team system. We're the 6 seed, so we should lose to the 3 seed. They've proven over the course of the season that they're better. Or so the thinking would go. So if we lose in 6 or 7, I don't think there's a problem...it'll be more of a "well, let's see what happens when the team is healthy next year" thing.

Over the last 3 years, we'll have lost once as a favorite (the HOU series), but that was explained away as "learning how to play in the playoffs against a solid, veteran team". We've lost once as an underdog-with-a-shot, and that was explained away as "if Roy would've been healthy, they couldn't have hidden Nash on defense and stifled our only perimeter threat with Grant Hill." This year I think that, if we lose to the Mavs, it can be explained as "the better team won b/c they had homecourt. Wait 'til next year." And it'll probably be right.

That said, if we beat the Mavs and get swept by the L*kers by an average of 50 pts, Nate's still a mortal lock to be here next year. When the franchise hasn't been to the 2nd round in over a decade, you earn quite a bit with a series win.

EDIT: Unless the L*kers or Bobcats offer him a big-time contract. And even then, I don't know that he goes.

 

[Tince]

EDIT: Unless the L*kers or Bobcats offer him a big-time contract. And even then, I don't know that he goes.

I agree with your post all the way. But I don't think this part is accurate. Nate is under contract for 2 more season after next year. This isn't like college football, Nate doesn't have a buyout clause that I'm aware of, so no amount of money will make him leave.

I believe the only circumstance he would leave is if Portland allowed him to walk to other teams (which is doubtful), he gets offered a huge contract (doubtful), and he asks Portland to release him of his current contract (really doubtful).

I think the earliest Nate could get fired is next off-season, and that would only happen if we missed the playoffs.

 

[oldmangrouch]

54 wins and a first round exit.
50 wins and a first round exit.
48 wins and ???

That body of work got KP, Penn, and various assistant coaches fired....but it got Nate an extension. With coaches like Sloan and Adelman being available....Nate got an extension. I seriously doubt another play-off beatdown is going to change anything.

 

[PapaG]

This series isn't a referendum on McMillan, IMO. The Blazers are the 6th seed, the Mavs are the 3rd seed, and the Blazers are short two of their supposed "Big Three" with Roy being hobbled, and Oden being out yet again. Instead of bitching about Nate, it would be refreshing to acknowledge what he has accomplished as a coach the past three years through adversity.

Same old people; same old anti-Nate agendas...

 

[Tince]

54 wins and a first round exit.
50 wins and a first round exit.
48 wins and ???

That body of work got KP, Penn, and various assistant coaches fired....but it got Nate an extension. With coaches like Sloan and Adelman being available....Nate got an extension. I seriously doubt another play-off beatdown is going to change anything.

I know most think I'm Nate's biggest fan, but I would gladly welcome either of those two to replace Nate. I would worry that Sloan wouldn't be around long, but I'd still understand the decision to make the change. I think Nate is a Top 10 coach in the league, so unless we can replace him with another top coach, its never made sense to get rid of him.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I don't see this as a "make it or break it". Granted, Nate's playoff rotations have been poor and his game decisions equally poor. But he always gets us here and we are playing a seed higher than us.

 

[jlprk]

Good, concise breakdown of the situation - but can further clarify how you'd feel if:

We win in 3 =

???

I will give up the beer, wine, liquor, reds, whites, acid, mesc, coke, hash, grass, opium, mushrooms, chewing tobacco, and my beloved footlong corncob stinky pipe.


However, I may learn one of those new things like crack to compensate.

 

[magnifier661]

Nah it ain't make or break. When Nate has a healthy roster and we fail in the playoffs again is when Nate will be in the hot seat. Not saying I agree, but they have plenty of excuses why they are playing with house money.

 

[maxiep]

The guy just won coach of the month. For the past two years he has held this team together with rubber bands and bubblegum. And somehow this series is supposed to be a referendum on him? I just don't get it.

 

[Sug]

The guy just won coach of the month. For the past two years he has held this team together with rubber bands and bubblegum. And somehow this series is supposed to be a referendum on him? I just don't get it.

There is nothing to get, like many have pointed out it is simply blind hate of Nate. Most coaches, maybe even Phil Jackson would have probably coached this team into the lottery. That said, Nate has some work to do in order to demonstrate he can coach elite talent. The problem is that we need that elite talent for him to do that. There may not be a better coach at getting blood from a stone so to speak. They talk about Pop doing it in San Antonio, but he still has elite talent around those players. We don't.

 

[mook]

...But how does Dallas match up especially on Wallace? To my thinking, Marion pretty much has to draw the primary guard as he's the only one on their roster with the size and athleticism to stay with him.

See, that's really exciting to me. I remember seeing Marion trying to guard Aldridge in the post this year, and it was a joke. He just went right through him like he wasn't there. Just too short and not strong enough. I think they have to have whoever plays center guard Aldridge, which means either Chandler or Haywood or Dirk. So like you say, Marion goes on Wallace.

I think our primary objective early in the game is to get Chandler out of there. First try to have Aldridge get him in foul trouble. If that isn't working, push the tempo with Wallace/Miller/Batum and make having two seven footers out there too much of a slow liability. Dallas' defense is a house of cards that comes crashing down without Chandler.

 

[MARIS61]

It'll be a miracle if Nate finds a way to win this series.

We have 7 and 1/2 players and no backup bigs at all. Nothing else for Nate to go to if a player gets hurt or has a bad game.

 

[magnifier661]

See, that's really exciting to me. I remember seeing Marion trying to guard Aldridge in the post this year, and it was a joke. He just went right through him like he wasn't there. Just too short and not strong enough. I think they have to have whoever plays center guard Aldridge, which means either Chandler or Haywood or Dirk. So like you say, Marion goes on Wallace.

I think our primary objective early in the game is to get Chandler out of there. First try to have Aldridge get him in foul trouble. If that isn't working, push the tempo with Wallace/Miller/Batum and make having two seven footers out there too much of a slow liability. Dallas' defense is a house of cards that comes crashing down without Chandler.

What makes this even more exciting. A year or two ago, Marion would be able to guard Aldridge. Tells you a lot about how Aldridge has improved his toughness.

 

[magnifier661]

It'll be a miracle if Nate finds a way to win this series.

We have 7 and 1/2 players and no backup bigs at all. Nothing else for Nate to go to if a player gets hurt or has a bad game.

Stop being a worry wart. Blazers in 5

 

[Minstrel]

The Blazers just a few weeks ago used a large body of work to determine that they wanted him back and I can't see situation where they let 4 games change their mind.

This is exactly right. No four- or seven-game stretch "defines" a coach or player. Everything that has happened up to this point (except for the end of this season which, if anything, reflects well on him) has already been factored into the extension decision.

Further, casting last season's playoff loss as being out-coached is a gross mischaracterization, IMO. Roy's injury allowed Gentry to make the move to put Hill on Miller after Miller lit them up. Batum's injury further reduced Portland's (and McMillan's) ability to counter. Gentry didn't make some brilliant move that McMillan didn't counter. Gentry made the obvious move (put his best defender, rather than his worst defender, on Miller and collapse his team defense when Miller penetrated past Hill, forcing other Blazers to beat them with shooting which they didn't) and it was enabled by injury...not McMillan's coaching.

I think McMillan is an average game-planning coach and one of the better NBA coaches at keeping his team focused. That makes him valuable to keep around unless a top-tier coach (like Adelman or Jackson) became available and expressed interest in coaching Portland.

 

[PapaG]

This is exactly right. No four- or seven-game stretch "defines" a coach or player. Everything that has happened up to this point (except for the end of this season which, if anything, reflects well on him) has already been factored into the extension decision.

Further, casting last season's playoff loss as being out-coached is a gross mischaracterization, IMO. Roy's injury allowed Gentry to make the move to put Hill on Miller after Miller lit them up. Batum's injury further reduced Portland's (and McMillan's) ability to counter. Gentry didn't make some brilliant move that McMillan didn't counter. Gentry made the obvious move (put his best defender, rather than his worst defender, on Miller and collapse his team defense when Miller penetrated past Hill, forcing other Blazers to beat them with shooting which they didn't) and it was enabled by injury...not McMillan's coaching.

I think McMillan is an average game-planning coach and one of the better NBA coaches at keeping his team focused. That makes him valuable to keep around unless a top-tier coach (like Adelman or Jackson) became available and expressed interest in coaching Portland.

Top-tier Adelman missed the playoffs his final two seasons in Houston fighting with injury issues. Lower-tier McMillan made the playoffs those same two season with arguable more injury issues.

 

[Minstrel]

Top-tier Adelman missed the playoffs his final two seasons in Houston fighting with injury issues. Lower-tier McMillan made the playoffs those same two season with arguable more injury issues.

Houston has worse talent than Portland, IMO, this season and last. That Houston was generally as good or better than Portland when they had Yao is a testament to his coaching. Whenever Yao went down, that team was in much worse straits than Portland has been, IMO. But Adelman still kept them competitive.

 

[PapaG]

Houston has worse talent than Portland, IMO, this season and last. That Houston was generally as good or better than Portland when they had Yao is a testament to his coaching. Whenever Yao went down, that team was in much worse straits than Portland has been, IMO. But Adelman still kept them competitive.

I disagree, especially in 2009-10. Nate coaxed 50 wins out of a team that would ordinarily have been lucky to win 41. Anyhow, we disagree. Adelman had some uber-talented teams in Sacto, and couldn't even crack an NBA Finals appearance. I think he is largely overrated, and has proven that he can't coach talented teams to an NBA title.

 

[guest]

A coach may not have much control over individual matchups or the talent of his players, but I do believe he has a great deal of responsibility for how the team plays defensively. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the defense was atrocious for long stretches of the past two playoff series. There were multiple games where the Suns/Rockets got whatever shots they wanted.

I want to see an aggressive defense with players routinely closing out on shooters. I don't want to see scrubs like Aaron Brooks or Von Wafer blowing up like they did in the Rockets series or the team routinely leaving a guy like Jason Richardson wide open like they did in the Suns series.

 

[maxiep]

A coach may not have much control over individual matchups or the talent of his players, but I do believe he has a great deal of responsibility for how the team plays defensively. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the defense was atrocious for long stretches of the past two playoff series. There were multiple games where the Suns/Rockets got whatever shots they wanted.

I want to see an aggressive defense with players routinely closing out on shooters. I don't want to see scrubs like Aaron Brooks or Von Wafer blowing up like they did in the Rockets series or the team routinely leaving a guy like Jason Richardson wide open like they did in the Suns series.

Greatest. Moniker. Ever.

Repped.