McMillan excited about Andre

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Interesting.

The good news: Nate understands what he has in Miller, and values it. That should relieve much of the "Miller won't fit in" worries.

The bad news: It sounds like Nate and KP aren't entirely on the same page.

Also, I find it interesting that KP pretty much admits what many of us have suspected - he has a real emotional attachement to "his guys." Perhaps, too much so.

It will be fascinating to watch this play out.
 
oldmangrouch said:
Also, I find it interesting that KP pretty much admits what many of us have suspected - he has a real emotional attachement to "his guys." Perhaps, too much so.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was disturbing to me, too. Saying he has an "emotional connection" and "he believes in these guys" suggest a possible weakness in his ability to analyze.

I don't know what it means to "believe in" the players. He should believe in their proven ability. If he can move one or more of them for players who are better, he should believe in those players he can trade for.

I guess Bill Parcells has done fine having emotional investment in "his guys." But I'd really rather than Pritchard didn't put extra stock in players because he knows and likes them.

On the positive side, it sounds like Bayless has a fantastic attitude. Competitive but not an ego-maniac. I never bought that Portland had to deal Bayless and now this seems like there's absolutely no reason to worry about entering the season with Bayless as the third-stringer.
 
I'm excited that McMillan seems to think Dre can be a tutor of sorts for Bayless ... and from the sounds of things Bayless might even be amenable to it.

Anybody else wondering that if things go well enough you might even see Miller assume an assistant coaching role in a few years when his playing days are done -- maybe not here in Portland, but somewhere in the NBA?
 
Just wanted to follow up and say one other thing about the article in general; Quick is really a helluva good beat reporter and has really stepped up his writing in the past couple of seasons (probably doesn't hurt that he doesn't have to write about douchebaggy players and followup with the Portland PD to flesh out his stories).
 
oldmangrouch said:
Interesting.

The good news: Nate understands what he has in Miller, and values it. That should relieve much of the "Miller won't fit in" worries.

The bad news: It sounds like Nate and KP aren't entirely on the same page.

Also, I find it interesting that KP pretty much admits what many of us have suspected - he has a real emotional attachement to "his guys." Perhaps, too much so.

It will be fascinating to watch this play out.
Click to expand...
That bothered me also, and I couldn't help but chuckle when I read a little later in the article:

"Last I checked, the NBA is not about feelings. It's about winning."
 
Minstrel said:
Yeah, that was disturbing to me, too. Saying he has an "emotional connection" and "he believes in these guys" suggest a possible weakness in his ability to analyze.

I don't know what it means to "believe in" the players. He should believe in their proven ability. If he can move one or more of them for players who are better, he should believe in those players he can trade for.

I guess Bill Parcells has done fine having emotional investment in "his guys." But I'd really rather than Pritchard didn't put extra stock in players because he knows and likes them.

On the positive side, it sounds like Bayless has a fantastic attitude. Competitive but not an ego-maniac. I never bought that Portland had to deal Bayless and now this seems like there's absolutely no reason to worry about entering the season with Bayless as the third-stringer.
Click to expand...

I agree about Bayless. He just needs to recognize that he is not ready to be the starter, and being tutored by Miller is no worse - and maybe better - than backing up Blake.
 
Nikolokolus said:
Just wanted to follow up and say one other thing about the article in general; Quick is really a helluva good beat reporter and has really stepped up his writing in the past couple of seasons (probably doesn't hurt that he doesn't have to write about douchebaggy players and followup with the Portland PD to flesh out his stories).
Click to expand...

Quick has gone from Damon (you cringe everytime he takes the court) to Travis (inconsistent, but good things happen at least *some* of the time!) :cheers:
 
Minstrel said:
Yeah, that was disturbing to me, too. Saying he has an "emotional connection" and "he believes in these guys" suggest a possible weakness in his ability to analyze.

I don't know what it means to "believe in" the players. He should believe in their proven ability. If he can move one or more of them for players who are better, he should believe in those players he can trade for.

I guess Bill Parcells has done fine having emotional investment in "his guys." But I'd really rather than Pritchard didn't put extra stock in players because he knows and likes them.

On the positive side, it sounds like Bayless has a fantastic attitude. Competitive but not an ego-maniac. I never bought that Portland had to deal Bayless and now this seems like there's absolutely no reason to worry about entering the season with Bayless as the third-stringer.
Click to expand...

He hasn't exactly bungled this group. The 2nd best record in the West, with a very young roster full of "his guys", seems like a good thing to me. Keep giving the fans "your guys", KP (just extend them, for Pete's sake).

Of course, I like this team and wonder how Miller fits in, but that seems to be a minority opinion, and I think that having Blake as a back-up PG compared to what the team had last year is a positive.
 
Nikolokolus said:
Just wanted to follow up and say one other thing about the article in general; Quick is really a helluva good beat reporter and has really stepped up his writing in the past couple of seasons (probably doesn't hurt that he doesn't have to write about douchebaggy players and followup with the Portland PD to flesh out his stories).
Click to expand...

The guy is a bum!
 
Minstrel said:
Saying he has an "emotional connection" and "he believes in these guys" suggest a possible weakness in his ability to analyze.
Click to expand...

"I love you guys."

--Coach Norman Dale, "Hoosiers"
 
Nikolokolus said:
I'm excited that McMillan seems to think Dre can be a tutor of sorts for Bayless ... and from the sounds of things Bayless might even be amenable to it.
Click to expand...

Just the opposite for me.

Sad to hear Nate is still beating that dead horse of falling head over heels for players simply 'cause they remind him of himself attitude-wise, then trying to mold them into some distorted replica of the young Nate McMillan, PG, whether they have the skills for it or not.

Better that Roy and Rudy school Bayless than waste Andre's time on trying to make him a PG.
 
It's great to hear that Bayless is taking everything in stride. I hope that he's the one to take over when Miller starts to deteriorate. I could definitely see Bayless in a Devis Harris type of situation back when he was with Dallas. Showing flashes, but taking a few years to develop. Hopefully we don't trade him when he's ripe to explode.

Heck, Bayless could even turn out to be very similar to Harris.
 
I don't ever remember agreeng with Quick more than i did in this article. I am shocked. I love this statement:

"Will Bayless be ready to inherit Blake's role? We'll see
But what's the rush? Worrying about Bayless' feelings? Please.

You certainly don't give up on the kid after one season, and if you are talking about trading him, what do you envision getting in return considering he is on a rookie salary? You don't just throw away a lottery pick. You develop them."
 
MARIS61 said:
Just the opposite for me.

Sad to hear Nate is still beating that dead horse of falling head over heels for players simply 'cause they remind him of himself attitude-wise, then trying to mold them into some distorted replica of the young Nate McMillan, PG, whether they have the skills for it or not.

Better that Roy and Rudy school Bayless than waste Andre's time on trying to make him a PG.
Click to expand...

Here's some handy links to help you get settled in with your new team:
http://www.sacbee.com/kings/
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/

Enjoy.
 
KP has no reason to not "believe in his guys". They have improved every single year he's been around. What reason does he have to partially break up a team that is consistently winning? You can't fault him for that.
 
C_note said:
KP has no reason to not "believe in his guys". They have improved every single year he's been around. What reason does he have to partially break up a team that is consistently winning? You can't fault him for that.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I think people need to realize the NBA isn't like your $50 Fantasy NBA League you play each season.
 
Tince said:
Agreed.

I think people need to realize the NBA isn't like your $50 Fantasy NBA League you play each season.
Click to expand...

True, and as the roster stands, we're pretty deep in the event of an injury:

Miller -> Blake
Roy -> Rudy
Batum -> Webster
LMA -> Outlaw (or rookie)
Oden -> Pryzbilla

Everyone on the second list is a legit spot-starter, if not more like Pryzbilla. So we can play at a high level even though the injuries that will occur (because no team gets through the season without the injury bug...even just a little bit).
 
I'm not concerned about KPs love for his players. He didn't hesitate to dump Sergio and Frye.

And Quick agrees with me about Bayless (so probably I'm wrong). It won't hurt him to ride the pine for awhile.

barfo
 
BW didn't know when to quit dealing, but KP does and I like it!
 
Also, keep in mind that since the Blazers roster is so young, often times their salaries don't adequately reflect their talents. Travis Outlaw, for all his flaws, is a very, very, good player for $3.6 million. Show me another player at $3.6 million you could trade for Outlaw. Rudy Fernandez is set to make $1.1 million next season. Even Blake at $4 million is a bargain. In the NBA's system where you have to match salaries, it's difficult for the Blazers right now to get fair value in return.
Click to expand...

That is a excellent point too.
 
C_note said:
KP has no reason to not "believe in his guys". They have improved every single year he's been around. What reason does he have to partially break up a team that is consistently winning? You can't fault him for that.
Click to expand...

If his love is detached and logical, then of course there's no reason to be concerned.

If he's overvaluing his players because of emotional attachment then he's setting himself up to fail.

Nobody would blame him for loving Brandon Roy, because he's a very very good player. But loving Travis Outlaw or Steve Blake or Nic Batum and missing out on deals that would make the Blazers better because of an unwillingess to let go would be a bad thing to have happen.

Ed O.
 
Jason Quick is comparing Jerryd's situation to George Hill's :crazy:
FYI Quick, George Hill played 17 minutes in 77 games as the primary backup which he will be again next season.
Jerryd played 12 minutes in 53 games and he will again be the 3rd PG.
 
Ed O said:
Nobody would blame him for loving Brandon Roy, because he's a very very good player. But loving Travis Outlaw or Steve Blake or Nic Batum and missing out on deals that would make the Blazers better because of an unwillingess to let go would be a bad thing to have happen.
Click to expand...

That's a very vague statement, however, isn't it? It makes sense only if we know that there are those deals that will make the Blazers better and for a long period of time...

Heck, if you can swap Roy for LeBron you do it - but again - the deal is very unlikely.

The fact, as was pointed earlier in this thread - is that guys like Blake, Travis and the rooks give you a great production for their salary in this league - so making a trade that benefits the Blazers long term is not a given - since you will usually have to package several of them for one good player and other teams might want to package bad contracts with that one good player...
 
andalusian said:
That's a very vague statement, however, isn't it? It makes sense only if we know that there are those deals that will make the Blazers better and for a long period of time...
Click to expand...

I think it was intentionally vague...he wasn't criticizing a specific decision, since we don't know what decisions were there to be made. The point is, we rarely know what decisions were there to be made and, even when we do, we don't always know whether he made the right one (since we can't see the alternate futures).

We can be concerned with decision-making process, though. By and large, I've liked what I can discern of it, but if he really has an emotional investment in "his guys," that seems like a potential weakness in the process. Perhaps not...as Ed said, if he can somehow be emotionally invested in his guys and, at the same time, be logical and detached when it comes to trades, great. If he can't, though, then it's a weakness. And "emotional investment" usually is at odds with "logical and detached," so there's some reason for concern.
 
I am pretty sure he was very emotionally attached to Sergio - you got the feeling it was so in past interviews - but he still shipped him for cap-space when the opportunity presented itself...

So - personally, I am not worried about it. Sure he is emotionally attached to his past decisions, we all are. Those that are not are probably not people one should trust - because they are flip as the wind blows.

As long as the team seems to progress - I, personally, think he is doing a good job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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