Nate McMillan another 2 years (Contract Extension)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Come on how long have we had a healthy team for Nate to really be judged by? Usually the team just gets use to the new/healthy players and then there is a injury so I think this is a bogus claim.
However, he adapts quickly to players going down with injury. Shouldn't there be a similar adjustment period in both cases, if indeed it's merely that he hasn't had long enough to prove himself?
 
Blazers G Andre Miller on Nate: "I think I know a good coach from a coach that’s not so good. He definitely teaches the game the right way''


So this is a quote form Andre Miller . . . not really known as a kiss ass or media friendly or anything like that. In fact I think it is safe to say either Andre speaks his mind or remains silent.

Pretty knowledgeable and credible source if you ask me.

Is this the same thing you said when Miller tore into Nate and his pathetic offense as well?
 
Is this the same thing you said when Miller tore into Nate and his pathetic offense as well?

He never tore into Nate's offense . . . he didn't like Nate trying to control him.

But you know you are changing the topic . . . what about a vet PG who speaks his mind saying Nate is a good coach?

Is he Andre Miller wrong about that?
 
Where is that Kenny Vance fan who supported his statement from a few weeks ago that Nate would NOT be back?

I'm right here. Its hard to bat .1000

You think any media type is right 100% of the time? I never really supported that statement that he wasn't going to be back. I'm just letting you know that Vance has a better track record than nearly all media types in this market.
 
Lakers, Heat, Utah, etc. etc. would all be going after Nate if he didnt sign an extension with us. So those of you who are against Nate must have more knowledge about what makes a good coach then some of the best basketball GM's and execs in the world. :crazy:

We should be thankful for the job he's done and greatful that he truley wants to be a Trail Blazer for many more years.

I'm sorry but I won't be thankful for the job he does until he gets us out of the 1st round of the playoffs. His adjustments in last years playoffs were awful.
 
However, he adapts quickly to players going down with injury. Shouldn't there be a similar adjustment period in both cases, if indeed it's merely that he hasn't had long enough to prove himself?

There's a adjustment period either way, but he's had a injured team a lot more than a healthy one for any length of time.
 
You didn't answer my question. I find that odd when you quote me and then don't even bother replying to anything I said.


Is 10 years not enough time for you to judge a head coach in the NBA?

How many years do you need exactly?
 
Looks like Nate has a fairly healthy team playing well. How bout that.
 
Is 10 years not enough time for you to judge a head coach in the NBA?

How many years do you need exactly?

And he has done really well. Just look at what we've done the last few seasons especially with all the injuries. What some are saying though is that he can't coach a healthy Blazers team successfully which is why I said he hasn't had enough time with a healthy Blazers team to be judge by. You are not addressing that at all.
 
The nice thing about coaches is that they can be fired on a whim, with no lasting impact on salary caps, etc. The nice thing about the current Blazers ownership is that they seem exceedingly willing to drop serious coin on major team upgrades. Just look at how much the Gerald Wallace deal cost Paul Allen financially.

You put those two facts together, and it's hard not to be satisfied with this deal. It ties up a top 6 or 7 NBA coach for two years, but we always have the option to ditch him if something better comes along or he falls flat. What's not to like?
 
Besides, "Assclown McScribbles" is my favorite all-time NBA slander. I'd hate to see that one go away.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top