Terry Stotts has been extended

[mook]

Set aside my record, and my accomplishments, and my accolades. Pretend I am an unknown with no history to gauge me on. Just watch how my team plays, with no concern for wins and losses. What do you see? Do you see 5 guys working together to create ball movement and misdirection? Or do you see one guy with the ball and 4 other guys mostly standing around the perimeter, or maybe swapping positions around the perimeter?

I'll be honest with you guys. I really don't have a clue how to use more than one guy at a time. I'm really lucky to be able to give the ball to Dame and tell everyone else to just get out of the way and shoot if the ball gets passed to them. Basketball if a pretty simple sport when you have a guy like Dame!

I think Mike D'Antoni is trolling us. Because he just described his tenure in Houston.

 

[Wade Garrett]

I enjoy these comments...nice discussion gents...
My two cents are simply this:
I like Stotts and like what he's done.
The injury excuse seems to lose validity as time goes by, that's just human nature. But it cannot be denied how the loss of 3 (now 4) starters has effected this year, and I have a difficult time judging anything we see because of it.
That being said, I've watched sports long enough to know no matter who the skipper is, eventually the voice becomes stale and it's time to move on.
We may be getting there with Coach Stotts, but I can't believe it would be right to make a move based on this season.

 

[wizenheimer]

CJ is a much better three point shooter than Ellis was, and frankly a better player. Ellis was a better passer and much better at drawing fouls though, so it's not like teams just ignored him on the offensive end. Both are 6'3 guys who are liabilities on defense, though, which is the bigger issue.

here's a comparison of the two. CJ now and Ellis the season before he was traded:



there are some differences in the two players, but the situations are quite similar

Dame puts up better numbers with higher efficiency without CJ. And CJ does the same without Dame. If they complemented each other that wouldn't happen to such a significant degree, especially in terms of efficiency

 

[kjironman1]

You can find good things said about every head coach in the NBA, that doesnt mean theyre all good NBA coaches.

And this is inline with the point I made before. Now were talking about a few quotes instead of whats happening out there on the court.

The guy asked me to provide quotes i did exactly that. Facts is Facts.
And these aren't just " A Few Quotes". This is literally every basketball mind in the league (NBA that is) that says these things. Stotts is continually in the running for COY. I apologize that it offends you if i feel these are more reputable than a few high school basketball players and a dude that played a few games in a junior college.

 

[kjironman1]

That being said, I've watched sports long enough to know no matter who the skipper is, eventually the voice becomes stale and it's time to move on.
We may be getting there with Coach Stotts, but I can't believe it would be right to make a move based on this season.

This is a very big statement. Made by a number of people including myself that feel the guy has done a decent job. Hate to lose a great guy and a solid coach but it might be time?

 

[Tince]

This is a very big statement. Made by a number of people including myself that feel the guy has done a decent job. Hate to lose a great guy and a solid coach but it might be time?

I think we have to dig a little deeper at why some coaches need to be replaced after a certain amount of time. My guess is that it is because their message doesn't ring with the leaders on the team. Do we think we've got to the point where Dame and CJ don't listen or respect Stotts? I don't know the answer, but my guess is that this is not the case. ee

Again, I don't think we're in a position where you get rid of someone like Stotts unless you know you can bring in someone better.

 

[Terry Stotts]

The guy asked me to provide quotes i did exactly that. Facts is Facts.
And these aren't just " A Few Quotes". This is literally every basketball mind in the league (NBA that is) that says these things. Stotts is continually in the running for COY. I apologize that it offends you if i feel these are more reputable than a few high school basketball players and a dude that played a few games in a junior college.

Now go find quotes from coaches speaking poorly about other coaches. Good luck -we don't often do it. We praise everyone but rarelu have a critical word to say about our peers.

 

[noknobs]

Personally I think it's unfair to judge any coach during a year in which he has 60% of the starting lineup (currently 80%) out for the vast majority of the season, was already dealing with huge roster turnover from last year, and a significant piece in Melo was added during the season (i.e. no training camp). This is especially true when that coach is coming off a year in which we made it to the final four unexpectedly.

I get the arguments about iso-ball, etc and hate the fact we're last in assists, but with the personnel we have now (Melo for example), it plays to their strengths. We just don't have a bench with all of the significant injuries. Fortunately Memphis is leaving the door open for us and three other teams and we might be getting two huge pieces back in about a week. I don't care if it's all just to play the Lakers in the first round, anything can happen.

 

[e_blazer]

Yes, the Blazers might have "lower desirability" than other places, but it's still a job that a lot of people would LOVE to have. I've listed off people I'd like to see with the Job, not because I hate Stotts or whatever (though on defense I don't like his scheme), it's because I think we've seen what he can do. I think we've maxed out what he can do for us as a coach.
-Messina, Mark Few, Ime Udoka, Hammond - to list a few. However, if a professional franchise does a search they should come up with some good candidates (we probably haven't thought of), and very, very few would Turn them down just because it's "Portland".
Part of the reason people have been upset with the coaching for 20 years is that we haven't had very many great coaches during that time.

I don't really blame Stotts for this year, are there things he maybe could do better to get more out of these guys? I guess. I'm of the opinion that their summer last year turns out it wasn't very good, they're still paying for 2016's issues, and with the injuries (all those things) the team just isn't very talented. However, I also believe I've seen enough of Stotts in the playoffs to say I'm definitely down with trying someone new, I think their offense and defense has grown kind of stale too. Time to try some new philosophies in my opinion.

I think it's hard to know how much of the "staleness" is due to Stotts and how much is due to roster problems. One thing that you have to consider is that both offense and defense take continuity to develop to their top level. Stotts was known as an offensive innovator when he was hired by the Blazers. I'm no great basketball X's and O's guy, but it seems to me that one of the goofiest things that gets said around here is that the Blazers just run a weave and isolation ball. That's hardly an accurate description of Stotts' play book. Check out these videos of some of the Blazers plays along with diagrams:



https://app.box.com/s/94nug5ijwaq2fq83i1kcp6z9x2pvtpfg



https://app.box.com/s/cqwlah1y10x7gvnt42j1hpimym9ln42m



https://app.box.com/s/j4xvmud59g8spg2y164wieh0t2p1in4a



The biggest problem offensively is that Stotts has had to dumb the offense down due to trying to incorporate new guys on the fly and not having much in the way of practice time to get them fully up to speed.

 

[brooklynballer]

I think I can get you a couple audio files that support this.

I'm curious, what players or coaches are out there who have said anything along the lines that Stotts in inept offensive mind?

That’s ludicrous. Coaching is a fraternity and nobody is going to talk “out their ass” about another coach. Similarly players, for the most part, don’t delve into providing criticism of any coach unless they’re angling for a trade. It’s a slippery slope for both coaches and players to comment on the competency of a peer or another team’s coach.

What I have heard, especially in the last five or six national broadcasts, is that the Blazers offense is very limited and iso-heavy. Phrases like “it’s very simple” and “they run the same play every time down the court” are commonplace now during nationally televised Blazers games. It’s only the local homer broadcasters that refrain from this critique.

Other than Lillard and McCollum, who out there is calling Stotts an offensive genius? Rick Carlisle (?) while he absolutely destroys Stotts’ game plan?

 

[Minstrel]

That’s ludicrous. Coaching is a fraternity and nobody is going to talk “out their ass” about another coach. Similarly players, for the most part, don’t delve into providing criticism of any coach unless they’re angling for a trade. It’s a slippery slope for both coaches and players to comment on the competency of a peer or another team’s coach.

Sure, you're almost never going to have a gainfully employed NBA coach bad mouthing another NBA coach. But they also don't have to say effusive things they don't actually believe about other coaches. Coaches usually don't comment on other coaches at all, so there's plenty of room to say nothing about a coach you consider substandard. The comments made by other coaches leave me with the impression that Stotts is a well-respected and well-regarded coach within that community.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I think it's hard to know how much of the "staleness" is due to Stotts and how much is due to roster problems. One thing that you have to consider is that both offense and defense take continuity to develop to their top level. Stotts was known as an offensive innovator when he was hired by the Blazers. I'm no great basketball X's and O's guy, but it seems to me that one of the goofiest things that gets said around here is that the Blazers just run a weave and isolation ball. That's hardly an accurate description of Stotts' play book. Check out these videos of some of the Blazers plays along with diagrams:



https://app.box.com/s/94nug5ijwaq2fq83i1kcp6z9x2pvtpfg



https://app.box.com/s/cqwlah1y10x7gvnt42j1hpimym9ln42m



https://app.box.com/s/j4xvmud59g8spg2y164wieh0t2p1in4a



The biggest problem offensively is that Stotts has had to dumb the offense down due to trying to incorporate new guys on the fly and not having much in the way of practice time to get them fully up to speed.

I feel like in the Post-season he isn't very quick to respond to mismatches, he doesn't make adjustments very quickly. -It was pretty telling all the stories of the Players having to beg him to let them Guard Curry on the perimeter last year. I'm not saying Stott's "playbook" is like 1 play long. I also understand it's unfair at times how we judge his plays because we've seen them all like 100's of times at this point. So yeah I can tell you what they're running with like 20 seconds on the shot clock every time down the court cause I've seen it over and over. Familiarity breeds contempt could definitely play a role in "our" feelings.

My main issue with Stotts has been his defensive Schemes. I think it doesn't change often enough, that they make weird decisions and I think while talent definitely plays a role you can tell a coach's personality by how their teams defend.

I agree with you though this year and all the practice time (or lack thereof), lack of bodies, injuries and all that, there are a lot of "roster" reasons for their performance this year and it affects how well a coach can coach too. I've always been a "detractor" I guess in his defense. The new orleans series really made me question his offense as well. However still today I find the lack of attention to detail on defense very frustrating. Does that mean he will or should get canned? Probably not and maybe.

I go back to though. I'm not sure what exactly Stotts has done to have stuck around as long as he has. The NBA is so competitive that guys who have accomplished more than him get fired fairly regularly. I'm sort of surprised that the organization has been ok with having one guy around most of a decade and such a poor overall playoff record. I think most of us, "like Terry" on a personal level, but the goal is winning and I think most teams/gms would have moved on by now.

 

[CupWizier]

I feel like in the Post-season he isn't very quick to respond to mismatches, he doesn't make adjustments very quickly. -It was pretty telling all the stories of the Players having to beg him to let them Guard Curry on the perimeter last year. I'm not saying Stott's "playbook" is like 1 play long. I also understand it's unfair at times how we judge his plays because we've seen them all like 100's of times at this point. So yeah I can tell you what they're running with like 20 seconds on the shot clock every time down the court cause I've seen it over and over. Familiarity breeds contempt could definitely play a role in "our" feelings.

My main issue with Stotts has been his defensive Schemes. I think it doesn't change often enough, that they make weird decisions and I think while talent definitely plays a role you can tell a coach's personality by how their teams defend.

I agree with you though this year and all the practice time (or lack thereof), lack of bodies, injuries and all that, there are a lot of "roster" reasons for their performance this year and it affects how well a coach can coach too. I've always been a "detractor" I guess in his defense. The new orleans series really made me question his offense as well. However still today I find the lack of attention to detail on defense very frustrating. Does that mean he will or should get canned? Probably not and maybe.

I go back to though. I'm not sure what exactly Stotts has done to have stuck around as long as he has. The NBA is so competitive that guys who have accomplished more than him get fired fairly regularly. I'm sort of surprised that the organization has been ok with having one guy around most of a decade and such a poor overall playoff record. I think most of us, "like Terry" on a personal level, but the goal is winning and I think most teams/gms would have moved on by now.

Why is it constantly brought up about not covering Curry on the perimeter? It was a one game situation 2 days after we had a long hard fought series with Denver and little time to game plan against the Warriors. It would be one thing if it was a common practice, but it wasn't. I have seen several teams employ a system allow a star player to go rabid while tyring to keep other players from having an impact so it's not just a Stotts or Blazers thing.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Why is it constantly brought up about not covering Curry on the perimeter? It was a one game situation 2 days after we had a long hard fought series with Denver and little time to game plan against the Warriors. It would be one thing if it was a common practice, but it wasn't. I have seen several teams employ a system allow a star player to go rabid while tyring to keep other players from having an impact so it's not just a Stotts or Blazers thing.

Because its an easy example thats obvious to everyone. Dropping from the best shooter in the history of basketball isnt a good idea. Its also quite strange that the stories from that game were he didnt want to change it but only did because the players begged for it.
Their defense has been pretty bad the entire time he’s been here though, I think they were maybe 6th in def efficiency in their very best year he’s been here. Im not gonna look that up right now but maybe later.

I dont think anyone can make a case that the Blazers defense has been good really in a long, long time. Not all of it is on Stotts of course talent plays a role, but Im not nor have I ever been excited about Stotts philosophies on that side of the ball.

 

[Terry Stotts]

I think it's hard to know how much of the "staleness" is due to Stotts and how much is due to roster problems. One thing that you have to consider is that both offense and defense take continuity to develop to their top level. Stotts was known as an offensive innovator when he was hired by the Blazers. I'm no great basketball X's and O's guy, but it seems to me that one of the goofiest things that gets said around here is that the Blazers just run a weave and isolation ball. That's hardly an accurate description of Stotts' play book. Check out these videos of some of the Blazers plays along with diagrams:



https://app.box.com/s/94nug5ijwaq2fq83i1kcp6z9x2pvtpfg



https://app.box.com/s/cqwlah1y10x7gvnt42j1hpimym9ln42m



https://app.box.com/s/j4xvmud59g8spg2y164wieh0t2p1in4a



The biggest problem offensively is that Stotts has had to dumb the offense down due to trying to incorporate new guys on the fly and not having much in the way of practice time to get them fully up to speed.

Yuck! I haven't made it all the way through, but after nearly halfway that's some pretty ugly offense. I think I have seen about 3 passes towards the hoop, otherwise the only time the ball goes towards the hoop is on a long jumper, or a dribble drive. All other passes are away from the hoop.

 

[hoopsjock]

Because its an easy example thats obvious to everyone. Dropping from the best shooter in the history of basketball isnt a good idea. Its also quite strange that the stories from that game were he didnt want to change it but only did because the players begged for it.
Their defense has been pretty bad the entire time he’s been here though, I think they were maybe 6th in def efficiency in their very best year he’s been here. Im not gonna look that up right now but maybe later.

I dont think anyone can make a case that the Blazers defense has been good really in a long, long time. Not all of it is on Stotts of course talent plays a role, but Im not nor have I ever been excited about Stotts philosophies on that side of the ball.

Also, they way he was to that reporter after the game proved how stubborn and rigid he is.

 

[CupWizier]

Because its an easy example thats obvious to everyone. Dropping from the best shooter in the history of basketball isnt a good idea. Its also quite strange that the stories from that game were he didnt want to change it but only did because the players begged for it.
Their defense has been pretty bad the entire time he’s been here though, I think they were maybe 6th in def efficiency in their very best year he’s been here. Im not gonna look that up right now but maybe later.

I dont think anyone can make a case that the Blazers defense has been good really in a long, long time. Not all of it is on Stotts of course talent plays a role, but Im not nor have I ever been excited about Stotts philosophies on that side of the ball.

It is ONE example. Like I said, if it had constantly been used then maybe a complaint is warranted. A one game example means pretty much nothing.

 

[Tince]

I think it's hard to know how much of the "staleness" is due to Stotts and how much is due to roster problems. One thing that you have to consider is that both offense and defense take continuity to develop to their top level. Stotts was known as an offensive innovator when he was hired by the Blazers. I'm no great basketball X's and O's guy, but it seems to me that one of the goofiest things that gets said around here is that the Blazers just run a weave and isolation ball. That's hardly an accurate description of Stotts' play book. Check out these videos of some of the Blazers plays along with diagrams:



https://app.box.com/s/94nug5ijwaq2fq83i1kcp6z9x2pvtpfg



https://app.box.com/s/cqwlah1y10x7gvnt42j1hpimym9ln42m



https://app.box.com/s/j4xvmud59g8spg2y164wieh0t2p1in4a



The biggest problem offensively is that Stotts has had to dumb the offense down due to trying to incorporate new guys on the fly and not having much in the way of practice time to get them fully up to speed.

Standing ovation to you!

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

It is ONE example. Like I said, if it had constantly been used then maybe a complaint is warranted. A one game example means pretty much nothing.

Can we use every game this year then as an example of how to not guard the three-point line cause they seem to really suck at it? Or last year for that matter?
There are a lot of examples of their poor defense. Not sure what you're trying to argue here. Do you think the defense is good?

 

[Tince]

It is ONE example. Like I said, if it had constantly been used then maybe a complaint is warranted. A one game example means pretty much nothing.

In 650 games, there are certainly going to be many examples of him making a decision that didn't work. The Game 1 example might be one of the more over-blown examples on here. We gave up 116 points dropping our big in Game 1. Then after adding more pressure and playing our bigs up higher, we gave up 114.3ppg in Games 2-4. In terms of statistics and sample size, it's hard to say the change had any impact at all. Given what I've read on here, you'd think we gave up 135 in Game 1 and after making the obvious adjustment, we held the Warriors under 100 the rest the series.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

In 650 games, there are certainly going to be many examples of him making a decision that didn't work. The Game 1 example might be one of the more over-blown examples on here. We gave up 116 points dropping our big in Game 1. Then after adding more pressure and playing our bigs up higher, we gave up 114.3ppg in Games 2-4. In terms of statistics and sample size, it's hard to say the change had any impact at all. Given what I've read on here, you'd think we gave up 135 in Game 1 and after making the obvious adjustment, we held the Warriors under 100 the rest the series.

Are they good defensively?

 

[Tince]

That’s ludicrous. Coaching is a fraternity and nobody is going to talk “out their ass” about another coach. Similarly players, for the most part, don’t delve into providing criticism of any coach unless they’re angling for a trade. It’s a slippery slope for both coaches and players to comment on the competency of a peer or another team’s coach.

What I have heard, especially in the last five or six national broadcasts, is that the Blazers offense is very limited and iso-heavy. Phrases like “it’s very simple” and “they run the same play every time down the court” are commonplace now during nationally televised Blazers games. It’s only the local homer broadcasters that refrain from this critique.

Other than Lillard and McCollum, who out there is calling Stotts an offensive genius? Rick Carlisle (?) while he absolutely destroys Stotts’ game plan?

I thought you were asking for examples? You can't ask for examples and then discredit the examples when they're offered to you.

I've never heard the term "limited offense", but maybe they are saying that now. Question is, were they saying that Portland's offense was limited last year during our playoff run? If not, wouldn't the logical conclusion be that the difference between this year and last year isn't Stotts knowledge off offense but the limited roster he has?

I'll try to listen closer to the broadcasting geniuses tonight and see if they say anything specific about Stotts coaching ability.

 

[Tince]

Are they good defensively?

Nope. This year, they're bad (for obvious reasons).

In the past, they've been average.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Nope. This year, they're bad (for obvious reasons).

In the past, they've been average.

Right and Im not just judging it on this year. I just haven't ever thought he was a good defensive coach. Could be wrong wouldn't be the first time.

 

[tester551]

I feel like in the Post-season he isn't very quick to respond to mismatches, he doesn't make adjustments very quickly. -It was pretty telling all the stories of the Players having to beg him to let them Guard Curry on the perimeter last year. I'm not saying Stott's "playbook" is like 1 play long. I also understand it's unfair at times how we judge his plays because we've seen them all like 100's of times at this point. So yeah I can tell you what they're running with like 20 seconds on the shot clock every time down the court cause I've seen it over and over. Familiarity breeds contempt could definitely play a role in "our" feelings.

My main issue with Stotts has been his defensive Schemes. I think it doesn't change often enough, that they make weird decisions and I think while talent definitely plays a role you can tell a coach's personality by how their teams defend.

I agree with you though this year and all the practice time (or lack thereof), lack of bodies, injuries and all that, there are a lot of "roster" reasons for their performance this year and it affects how well a coach can coach too. I've always been a "detractor" I guess in his defense. The new orleans series really made me question his offense as well. However still today I find the lack of attention to detail on defense very frustrating. Does that mean he will or should get canned? Probably not and maybe.

I go back to though. I'm not sure what exactly Stotts has done to have stuck around as long as he has. The NBA is so competitive that guys who have accomplished more than him get fired fairly regularly. I'm sort of surprised that the organization has been ok with having one guy around most of a decade and such a poor overall playoff record. I think most of us, "like Terry" on a personal level, but the goal is winning and I think most teams/gms would have moved on by now.

I have to agree with the lack of detail comment.... and it's not just defense.

Terry is a good coach, but nowhere near a great coach.

 

[Strenuus]

In 650 games, there are certainly going to be many examples of him making a decision that didn't work. The Game 1 example might be one of the more over-blown examples on here. We gave up 116 points dropping our big in Game 1. Then after adding more pressure and playing our bigs up higher, we gave up 114.3ppg in Games 2-4. In terms of statistics and sample size, it's hard to say the change had any impact at all. Given what I've read on here, you'd think we gave up 135 in Game 1 and after making the obvious adjustment, we held the Warriors under 100 the rest the series.

I agree. Stotts is an awful coach no matter what he does. And then hes worse than that at times.

 

[CupWizier]

Can we use every game this year then as an example of how to not guard the three-point line cause they seem to really suck at it? Or last year for that matter?
There are a lot of examples of their poor defense. Not sure what you're trying to argue here. Do you think the defense is good?

I was merely pointing out that using a single game as an example doesn't really have any weight. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Tince]

I agree. Stotts is an awful coach no matter what he does. And then hes worse than that at times.

Who do you consider an average coach?

 

[hoopsjock]

In 650 games, there are certainly going to be many examples of him making a decision that didn't work. The Game 1 example might be one of the more over-blown examples on here. We gave up 116 points dropping our big in Game 1. Then after adding more pressure and playing our bigs up higher, we gave up 114.3ppg in Games 2-4. In terms of statistics and sample size, it's hard to say the change had any impact at all. Given what I've read on here, you'd think we gave up 135 in Game 1 and after making the obvious adjustment, we held the Warriors under 100 the rest the series.

The defense they tried in Games 2-4 was actually somewhat effective (at least the half court defense). Let's say we ignore that they haven't been held accountable for stopping Green getting rebounds and going the length of the floor for several layups (which still happens a lot against other opponents this year).

Here are my issues:

When you haven't implored different defenses all year, trying a different defense in the WCF is the worst time to "try" a new one out. The rotations on the back side were often a split second too slow leading to open shots. If they had been practicing and implementing different defenses all season then it would have been crisper by then.

That leads into my other point that playing one defense against every team, every player, and in every situation is the definition of terrible coaching in my opinion. Especially when you consider that at best that defensive system has been average in his time here. Certain players (a la Curry in Game 1) it is a fact that you can't drop the big on him. It's indisputable. Yet, an NBA coach uses that strategy in a WCF game??? I don't care that it's one game, it's inexcusable to not be prepared. How are we going to win a championship only playing one type of defense that isn't even that effective against bad teams let alone contending teams? Dropping the big can be a great strategy in certain games. I'm of the opinion that you can't always do the same thing because the more predictable the defense is the less the offensive player has to think while attacking it. In a 7 game playoff series you not only have to make adjustments but your team should've been preparing all year for those adjustments.

I know Stotts is capable too. He tried a different defense against Houston this year and we blew them out of the gym. The next game against a similar offensive player (Luka) he didn't even try to use a similar strategy to Harden and we haven't seen that "Diamond and One" since. The Blazers have also been one of the worst teams at forcing turnovers under Stotts. It's because the opposing team knows how to attack Portland and they rarely adjust.

 

[CupWizier]

I agree. Stotts is an awful coach no matter what he does. And then hes worse than that at times.

The forum pretty much known your stance regarding Stotts and McCollum. You pretty much state it in every thread regarding them

The defense they tried in Games 2-4 was actually somewhat effective (at least the half court defense). Let's say we ignore that they haven't been held accountable for stopping Green getting rebounds and going the length of the floor for several layups (which still happens a lot against other opponents this year).

Here are my issues:

When you haven't implored different defenses all year, trying a different defense in the WCF is the worst time to "try" a new one out. The rotations on the back side were often a split second too slow leading to open shots. If they had been practicing and implementing different defenses all season then it would have been crisper by then.

That leads into my other point that playing one defense against every team, every player, and in every situation is the definition of terrible coaching in my opinion. Especially when you consider that at best that defensive system has been average in his time here. Certain players (a la Curry in Game 1) it is a fact that you can't drop the big on him. It's indisputable. Yet, an NBA coach uses that strategy in a WCF game??? I don't care that it's one game, it's inexcusable to not be prepared. How are we going to win a championship only playing one type of defense that isn't even that effective against bad teams let alone contending teams? Dropping the big can be a great strategy in certain games. I'm of the opinion that you can't always do the same thing because the more predictable the defense is the less the offensive player has to think while attacking it. In a 7 game playoff series you not only have to make adjustments but your team should've been preparing all year for those adjustments.

I know Stotts is capable too. He tried a different defense against Houston this year and we blew them out of the gym. The next game against a similar offensive player (Luka) he didn't even try to use a similar strategy to Harden and we haven't seen that "Diamond and One" since. The Blazers have also been one of the worst teams at forcing turnovers under Stotts. It's because the opposing team knows how to attack Portland and they rarely adjust.

Ok, so they tried something in game one and made adjustments and it was much better in games 2-4. The diamond and one was used after the Houston game. Opposing teams make adjustments as well.