NateBall Is Again Winning Games With Lesser Talent

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I think most can agree that Nateball is running ISO's, having guys stand and spot up in the corners, getting tough shots late in the clock, not taking advantage of te athleticism on the floor. Since Roy has gone out, Nate....or the team itself, has taken on a different style of play. I also think most of us that have had a problem with Nate, have had it because of the style of play. So god for him and the team, and I hope they both keep it up
 
Mediocre Man said:
I think most can agree that Nateball is running ISO's, having guys stand and spot up in the corners, getting tough shots late in the clock, not taking advantage of te athleticism on the floor. Since Roy has gone out, Nate....or the team itself, has taken on a different style of play. I also think most of us that have had a problem with Nate, have had it because of the style of play. So god for him and the team, and I hope they both keep it up
Click to expand...

The Blazers were winning at a much higher clip with Roy around - showing you that he did the right thing - he adjusted his offense to the best player he had and it worked. When Roy is out - he adjusts the system to his best player - Aldridge. I do not think Nate is the best ever - but he is very good at what he has - even if he takes some time to adjust.
 
andalusian said:
The Blazers were winning at a much higher clip with Roy around - showing you that he did the right thing - he adjusted his offense to the best player he had and it worked. When Roy is out - he adjusts the system to his best player - Aldridge. I do not think Nate is the best ever - but he is very good at what he has - even if he takes some time to adjust.
Click to expand...


As I have said in a zillion posts, it's not how well it works in the regular season, it's how well it works in the playoffs. It doesn't work in the playoffs.
 
WTF are you talking about? Since Roy left, we've been playing at a much quicker pace! We're getting more fast break points and movement on offense.

I'm glad we're playing this way, but what's disgusting, is that almost all the fans and all the TV announcers have been saying for years that we needed to ditch the stupid roy-iso offense, and it takes an injury to Roy for the Blazers to make the change.

Why couldn't Roy have played a Wesley Matthews role in this style of offense??
 
Mediocre Man said:
As I have said in a zillion posts, it's not how well it works in the regular season, it's how well it works in the playoffs. It doesn't work in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

What did not work in the playoffs? The Blazers being as green as they came the first year and still taking the Rockets to 6 games - the same team that was the only team that took the eventual champions to 7 games? Nate's coaching can't fix inexperience.

And the next year - Roy being out, Oden being out, Nic suffering an injury and this team still taking PHX to 6 games - the same team that swept the mighty Spurs with Pop as their coach? Nate's coaching is supposed to fix injuries?

If anyone but Roy did not appear star struck on that first series - this team would have done better. If Oden or Roy would have been healthy - this team would have walked all over the Suns last year. The sample size is tiny - and with the circumstances - Nate's coaching does not look too bad when you actually pay attention to injuries and what the teams that played against the Blazers did later in the playoffs.
 
Sinobas said:
Why couldn't Roy have played a Wesley Matthews role in this style of offense??
Click to expand...

For the same reason that Wes can't play the Roy role... they are different players with different skills/advantages?
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I feel sometimes like I was watching a diiferent Blazer team than some of you the last month and a half of the season last year. No one saw the alley oops to LMA from Miller when Brandon was in the game?
Click to expand...

Brandon saw them, that's why he demanded Miller be traded.
 
Mediocre Man said:
I think most can agree that Nateball is running ISO's, having guys stand and spot up in the corners, getting tough shots late in the clock, not taking advantage of te athleticism on the floor.
Click to expand...

Not pre-Roy it wasn't.
 
Sinobas said:
WTF are you talking about? Since Roy left, we've been playing at a much quicker pace! We're getting more fast break points and movement on offense.

I'm glad we're playing this way, but what's disgusting, is that almost all the fans and all the TV announcers have been saying for years that we needed to ditch the stupid roy-iso offense, and it takes an injury to Roy for the Blazers to make the change.

Why couldn't Roy have played a Wesley Matthews role in this style of offense??
Click to expand...

Funny I seem to remember a lot of national TV announcers talking about how the 4th quarter was "Roy Time" and then they would give some stat of how well we did in close games and how Roy was in the top 3 in points scored in the 4th quarter.

The bottom line though, is we needed both. We needed to get more movement, but the great teams also have a guy who can take the ball in a ISO situation, milk the clock, and score. Kobe, Wade, Lebron, Pierce all do that. Right now we don't, and that sucks.
 
Last edited:
andalusian said:
What did not work in the playoffs? The Blazers being as green as they came the first year and still taking the Rockets to 6 games - the same team that was the only team that took the eventual champions to 7 games? Nate's coaching can't fix inexperience.

And the next year - Roy being out, Oden being out, Nic suffering an injury and this team still taking PHX to 6 games - the same team that swept the mighty Spurs with Pop as their coach? Nate's coaching is supposed to fix injuries?

If anyone but Roy did not appear star struck on that first series - this team would have done better. If Oden or Roy would have been healthy - this team would have walked all over the Suns last year. The sample size is tiny - and with the circumstances - Nate's coaching does not look too bad when you actually pay attention to injuries and what the teams that played against the Blazers did later in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

This guy has it right. The playoffs hardly repudiated McMillan's chosen style. Roy was easily the best player on the team and McMillan built the offense to take advantage of Roy's strengths. That's what all teams do when they have a franchise player. The fact that he's changed the style with Roy lost as franchise player shows that "Nateball" simply means leveraging your best player. Now it's Aldridge.
 
The problem with the Roy-iso offense was that it was soooo predictable, and over the last two seasons teams have figured out how to defend it.
 
Natebishop3 said:
The problem with the Roy-iso offense was that it was soooo predictable, and over the last two seasons teams have figured out how to defend it.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that they figured out how to defend it. The Spurs and Jazz are predictable generally too. The offense was working fine with a healthy Roy. In the playoffs, the team basically didn't have Roy (or Oden).

Now, with no Roy, McMillan has changed styles to one that maximizes Aldridge. Isn't that exactly the kind of adjustment you'd like a coach to make?
 
There are 2 theories. 1) Nate changed his way of thinking this season. 2) Some other influence changed the system.

I say it was the new assistant coaches and the ascendancy of Andre Miller who modified McMillan's weird former system with conventional thinking. Replacing selfish Bayless with Rudy greatly helped the passing game. Sergio would look better in this system than he did being Roy's little butler.
 
Minstrel said:
I don't agree that they figured out how to defend it. The Spurs and Jazz are predictable generally too. The offense was working fine with a healthy Roy. In the playoffs, the team basically didn't have Roy (or Oden).

Now, with no Roy, McMillan has changed styles to one that maximizes Aldridge. Isn't that exactly the kind of adjustment you'd like a coach to make?
Click to expand...

I'm a skeptic. I don't think Nate is at the heart of this. I don't have any evidence that he didn't make the adjustment, just as you don't have any evidence that he did.

But comparing the Roy-iso to the Jazz or Spurs in terms of predictability is false. The Jazz run a pick and roll with a lot of movement. The Roy-iso was simply Brandon Roy at the top of the key with a clear-out and maybe a screen to free him up. It was extremely easy to defend if teams figured out that they could just double Roy instead of switching on the screen. I saw Washington do it. I saw Houston do it.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I'm a skeptic. I don't think Nate is at the heart of this. I don't have any evidence that he didn't make the adjustment, just as you don't have any evidence that he did.
Click to expand...

The default is that the coach determines how the team plays. It's silly to say "You have no evidence that the style that team is playing has anything to do with the coach." Tin foil hat theories that the team has mutinied and does whatever it wants need evidence, not the default assumption that the coach makes the decisions.

But comparing the Roy-iso to the Jazz or Spurs in terms of predictability is false. The Jazz run a pick and roll with a lot of movement. The Roy-iso was simply Brandon Roy at the top of the key with a clear-out and maybe a screen to free him up. It was extremely easy to defend if teams figured out that they could just double Roy instead of switching on the screen.
Click to expand...

Considering Roy is an excellent passer, that's not all that defenses had to do, as Roy could beat double teams with passes. Whenever Roy was healthy, the team rolled. After he came back from his injury last year, the team looked great down the stretch. Then he got hurt again and the team looked bad in the playoffs.

I saw Washington do it. I saw Houston do it.
Click to expand...

I've seen the Lakers, Spurs and Jazz shut down. Clearly, they're predictable and easy to shut down.
 
Minstrel said:
The default is that the coach determines how the team plays. It's silly to say "You have no evidence that the style that team is playing has anything to do with the coach." Tin foil hat theories that the team has mutinied and does whatever it wants need evidence, not the default assumption that the coach makes the decisions.



Considering Roy is an excellent passer, that's not all that defenses had to do, as Roy could beat double teams with passes. Whenever Roy was healthy, the team rolled. After he came back from his injury last year, the team looked great down the stretch. Then he got hurt again and the team looked bad in the playoffs.



I've seen the Lakers, Spurs and Jazz shut down. Clearly, they're predictable and easy to shut down.
Click to expand...

Nate had been saying for years that they wanted to run, but they never did run until now. So is that Nate lying about what he wanted to do or the team ignoring him?
 
Natebishop3 said:
Nate had been saying for years that they wanted to run, but they never did run until now. So is that Nate lying about what he wanted to do or the team ignoring him?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, neither. I think what used to happen was that McMillan liked the idea of running, but placed an even greater emphasis on not making mistakes or turning the ball over. Since these tend to be somewhat opposing desires, the stronger one is the one that ended being guiding. If your coach wants you to run but also wants you to take care of the ball, and it's the turnovers get you benched, which one are you going to do?

Now, I assume that McMillan realizes that a conservative half-court offense won't work without a great half-court player (as Roy was), so he's changed the weighting of the different priorities. He's probably more willing to accept turnovers, because he knows that an extremely careful, methodical offense won't work as well with the current personnel.

Do I know all of this for a fact? No, but it seems a lot more likely to me than that the players have taken over and are running the show themselves. Unless some evidence to the contrary comes to light, I default to the coach determining how the team plays. And the fact that the team is playing differently now, reflecting the changed roster dynamic, is a mark in McMillan's favor to me.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Nate had been saying for years that they wanted to run, but they never did run until now. So is that Nate lying about what he wanted to do or the team ignoring him?
Click to expand...

He's lying. He knows he should install such a system, but he knows he doesn't know how. So the filthy rat blames his players.
 
Last season I had a line in my sig that said: "Miller > Nate." What I meant was, Miller ball was superior to Nate ball, and I'd rather have had Miller calling the offense than Nate. I will probably never forget the report of Nate yelling at Miller in practice: "You don't play the way we play!" Now, they play the way Miller plays. Thank god for that.

I have given Nate props this season for apparently listening to his new assistants and adjusting "the way we play" to take advantage of the non-Roy personnel on the team. I would not dispute that, in the past, setting up Brandon in the 4th quarter of games won us a lot of games. I do dispute the argument that because we won 50+ games playing "Roy-ball" it proves that was a superior system at the time to the system we run now. It proves nothing. There is simply no way to conclude they'd have been worse playing this way, with Roy on the team.

I'm happy with the way the team is playing and with the offense that they are using. If we could get a reasonably healthy Brandon Roy to buy into that system it would be even better.
 
McMillan's system is similar to last year's in that once the opponent gets used to our system by the 4th quarter, we can't score anymore. Last year, Roy would bail us out. This year, we just go ahead and lose the game. But other things aren't under the control of the filthy rat. Camby and Miller force some alley oops that didn't happen before their arrivals. Players look to pass to players other than just Roy, only because Roy isn't on the floor. It's clear that McMillan didn't change, so we should look elsewhere for the causes.
 
jlprk said:
McMillan's system is similar to last year's in that once the opponent gets used to our system by the 4th quarter, we can't score anymore. Last year, Roy would bail us out. This year, we just go ahead and lose the game. But other things aren't under the control of the filthy rat. Camby and Miller force some alley oops that didn't happen before their arrivals. Players look to pass to players other than just Roy, only because Roy isn't on the floor. It's clear that McMillan didn't change, so we should look elsewhere for the causes.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much how I feel. I don't think McMillan has anything to do with it.
 
the players have filled the gaps and finally we need to play to our team strengths vs. the preference of our premier player.
 
jlprk said:
McMillan's system is similar to last year's in that once the opponent gets used to our system by the 4th quarter, we can't score anymore. Last year, Roy would bail us out. This year, we just go ahead and lose the game. But other things aren't under the control of the filthy rat. Camby and Miller force some alley oops that didn't happen before their arrivals. Players look to pass to players other than just Roy, only because Roy isn't on the floor. It's clear that McMillan didn't change, so we should look elsewhere for the causes.
Click to expand...


Sorry, but I agree with you also. I am sorry because now a lot of people will attack this theaory because of my supposed blind hatred for Mr Sonic
 
Despite whatever you think about Nate McMillan, he's by far the most accomplished, most professional, most honest member of the Blazers management team, and apparently the only one who knows much about basketball.

I expect him to leave this naively inept gaggle of geeks the next chance he gets.
 
MARIS61 said:
Despite whatever you think about Nate McMillan, he's by far the most accomplished, most professional, most honest member of the Blazers management team, and apparently the only one who knows much about basketball.

I expect him to leave this naively inept gaggle of geeks the next chance he gets.
Click to expand...

The sad thing is, I could agree with every word you just typed....and still believe Nate is just an average coach who is poorly suited to coaching this current team.
 
I used "filthy rat" in place of McMillan twice in this thread to get a rise out of someone, anyone. I don't really think he's a filthy rat. I should stop trying to provoke people.

I'm sure he showers.
 
jlprk said:
McMillan's system is similar to last year's in that once the opponent gets used to our system by the 4th quarter, we can't score anymore.
Click to expand...

Yet, the Blazers averaged 24 points in the 4th quarter last season while giving up 23.5.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/average-4th-quarter-margin

Conversely, this season, the "improved" non-NateBall Blazers are averaging 22.8 points in the 4th quarter, and giving up 23.3.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/4th-quarter-points-per-game

So ... what were you saying?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Blazers Hot Team Stats Last 10 Games
Replies
8
Views
924
handiman
handiman
BrianFromWA
Forensic look at Big-Man Shooting
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
BrianFromWA
BrianFromWA
B-Roy
OT-ish: "Move it or you die"
Replies
3
Views
293
Draco
Draco
Reep
Hollinger Forecast: Blazers
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
PapaG
PapaG
santeesioux
So what will the excuse be when the "interims" become permanent?
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
santeesioux
santeesioux

Users who are viewing this thread

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