Which is More Significant: Finishing 3rd in the West or the Playoff Sweep?

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Ill be honest I don't think Hughes sticking around would have made a bit of difference with Leonard. He's not born passionate round baller and he will either get a bit better each year through osmosis or retire because he has no interest anymore other than the pay day.

Maybe, we won’t ever really know... Leonard had improved with Hughes and basically dropped off afterwards. Then other bigs haven’t really gotten much better after he left either.

 

[tlongII]

They should hire a big man coach for the optics alone!

 

[dviss1]

I’ll fight anyone who says sheed wouldn’t be a good mentor for Collins and toughen up Meyers.

MF you almost made me spit my coffee out!!

 

[dviss1]

Absolutely. The lack of a proven big man coach on a team that has a roster full of young big men is baffling to me.

The coaching staff has done a great job developing guards, but all of our young big men, recent and present, have struggled to develop - especially on the offensive end.

Can you imagine how good this team would be if our bigs developed to the same level as our guards?

Meyers, Vonleh and Collins were all lottery picks. We've seen what happened to the first two. I'm really trepidatious about Collins' future without the kind of coaching he needs to meet his full potential.

Even Nurk still needs work on the offensive end. He was better when he arrived out of shape from DEN than he was after our staff got a hold of him. He went from the Bosnian Beast we saw during Nurk fever to tossing up weak, off balance, low percentage flip shots.

Jeezus Paul, pry open your wallet and hire the best available big man coach on the planet. Your spending hundreds of millions of dollars in salaries on these young big men. For less than 1% of that amount, you could actually maximize your return on that investment - unless, of course you're happy with the way Meyers Leonard and Noah Vonleh turned out.

And if Neil still has his panties in a wad over Kim Hughes talking to the media before Neil could put his spin on losing Aldridge for nothing, tell him he either hires a proven big man coach or his ass is fired. This is fucking ridiculous. In the 3 years since Neil fired Kim Hughes, not one single POR big man has improved on the offensive end. In fact, Meyers and Nurk have both regressed. Meyers is a lost cause. You had to pay CHI cash money to take Vonleh off your hands. You spent three first round picks in a deep draft on two more young bigs - both who are struggling mightily on the offensive end. Yet, still no big man coach. How can you possibly be this stupid????

This team will only go as far as our young big men take us. Dame and C.J. are great, but they are what they are. They, alone, cannot make this team a contender in the stacked Western Conference. Given Neil's inability to attract even average free agents, the development of Nurk and Collins is our only hope to ever be more than first round fodder for the real contenders in the West. You need to pour every penny you can into developing our young big men, because if they don't reach their full potential, this team has reached it's peak. Again, that's ok - if you're happy with how they performed in the playoffs against NOP. If not, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

Neil talks and talks and talks about trying to get Dame help, but he has failed miserably at attracting the kind of two-way players this team needs in supporting roles. Well, guess what, you have two potential great 2-way players on your roster already. But, unless you do something, that potential, and Damian Lillard's career, will be wasted. Maybe you're happy with that, but I doubt if Dame is.

BNM

How do we put up enough stink that a media member will ask him a question about this?

 

[Mediocre Man]

How do we put up enough stink that a media member will ask him a question about this.

You'd just get an answer that started with "look" and then a bunch a deflecting answers.

 

[e_blazer]

Here's an interesting quote from Stotts the year that the Blazers hired Kim Hughes:

"I hired Kim Hughes [former ABA and NBA center]. He's already spent a lot of time with [draft pick] Meyers Leonard. I don't think you have to be a big man to coach big men, but I think there's a certain comfort level and an understanding for a young big man to be working with someone big. It's like, 'He's been where I'm going. He knows what I'm going through.' ... But if you do hire a coach specifically to work with your big men, he's got to be more than just big. He's got to be qualified."

The article is six years old, but it offers some insights pro and con as to the hiring of a big big man coach.

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/11/nba-big-man-coaches-becoming-a-rarity/

 

[Boob-No-More]

Here's an interesting quote from Stotts the year that the Blazers hired Kim Hughes:



The article is six years old, but it offers some insights pro and con as to the hiring of a big big man coach.

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/11/nba-big-man-coaches-becoming-a-rarity/

That link has been posted several times whenever the subject of a dedicated proven big man coach comes up. So, think they are beneficial, some think they aren't. While, I don't think you HAVE to be a big man to coach big men, I do think we need SOMEONE better than what we have.

Meyers was making progress under Kim Hughes, and I know some here will say Meyers was never going to amount to anything anyway, but how do we know that? He may have never been great, he may have never lived up to his draft position, but he IMMEDIATELY back slid as soon as Hughes was fired. Hughes has a long proven track record of developing NBA big men, and beyond that, he was a mentor to Meyers. He was actually working with Meyers in Illinois when he made the comment to the media about losing Aldridge that got him fired.

I guess my biggest question is, what do we have to lose by adding a proven big man coach to the staff? His salary will be a pittance compared to the players he'll be working with. His salary doesn't count against the cap or the luxury tax. He doesn't take up a roster spot. In fact, there are absolutely no limitations on how many assistant coaches you can have and how much you can pay them. The NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement is between the owners and the players. It does not apply to coaches.

So, why don't we have a proven dedicated big man coach? They certainly thought it was a good idea when we hired Hughes. Since that time, our guards have developed wonderfully, but ALL of our young big men, including three that were lottery picks, have struggled - especially offensively.

Meyers is the one whose lack of development gets the most attention and draws the most ire from posters here, but Noah Vonleh never acquired a single, dependable, repeatable low post move in his nearly three years working with our coaching staff. Statistically, Vonleh was better as a rookie in CHO and better last season in CHI than he was during his time in POR.

Last year we spent three first round picks drafting two 19-year old big men who are now pushing 21. Both struggled and continue to struggle on the offensive end. We are all intrigued and impressed by Zach Collins on the defensive end, but after a full season in the NBA, he still struggled to score against summer league completion for the second year in a row. Swanigan who looked dominant in his first summer league, struggled to score in his second. Not only did he not improve, he regressed.

Nurk, who arrived out of shape from DEN was dominant during Nurk Fever, but regressed offensively during his first full season in POR.

Can anyone name one young Portland big man who has improved since Kim Hughes was fired? The pattern has been either no improvement, or getting worse. That's not a good trend.

I really think this is an ego thing. If they hire a new big man coach, it's like admitting they never should have fired Hughes in the first place. It's also admitting the current staff has not done a good job developing big men. Well, guess what, the results speak for themselves. You're not fooling anyone. You're throwing away 1st round picks on players who haven't and won't reach their potential. You are throwing away Paul Allen's investment in these young big men and you are pissing away the prime of Damian Lillard's career.

Dame has asked for help in the area of veteran players. You have failed to give it to him. So, how about giving him some help in maximizing the play of the players you have surrounded him with?

The front office will continue to shrug off any suggestion of needing a big man coach by the media. After a summer that brought no significant veteran help to the roster, I hope Dame has another come to Jesus meeting with Paul Allen and demands they hire a PROVEN dedicated big man coach. At this point, the level of team success for Damian Lillard is tied to the development of Jusuf Nurkic and Zach Collins. We aren't getting a Paul George or Kawhi Leonard. We need to maximize the talent we have. I know some are tired of this "narrative", but I'm tried of seeing none of our big men getting better, and many of them actually getting worse.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

BTW, Kim Hughes turned Chris Kaman into an all star. He also worked with Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan in LA.

Bob Thornton turned Marc Gasol into a all star and DPOY in MEM. When the Pau for Marc trade happened people were outraged because they thought the Lakers stole Pau from MEM and Marc Gasol would never amount to anything.

Here's what Marc Gasol said about working with Thorton:

"Marc Gasol believes it helps that he can see eye-to-eye, literally, with the person doing the specific, intensive position work. "Big men know there are different things you have to look at. Having a guy who really understands that -- preferably a guy who has played there -- it helps, particularly with the younger guys to make the transition easier. They've been through already what you're going through.""

A proven big man coach like Thorton can even teach a savvy vet like Zach Randolph a few new tricks.

Kevin McHale turned Kevin Love into an all star in MIN.

Not every young big man needs that kind of dedicated coaching to develop. Some have a more natural feel for the game. Some have received that coaching at a lower level. Some staffs do a good job of developing young big men without a dedicated big man coach. Ours, unfortunately, does not.

BNM

 

[e_blazer]

BTW, Kim Hughes turned Chris Kaman into an all star. He also worked with Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan in LA.

Bob Thornton turned Marc Gasol into a all star and DPOY in MEM. When the Pau for Marc trade happened people were outraged because they thought the Lakers stole Pau from MEM and Marc Gasol would never amount to anything.

Here's what Marc Gasol said about working with Thorton:

"Marc Gasol believes it helps that he can see eye-to-eye, literally, with the person doing the specific, intensive position work. "Big men know there are different things you have to look at. Having a guy who really understands that -- preferably a guy who has played there -- it helps, particularly with the younger guys to make the transition easier. They've been through already what you're going through.""

A proven big man coach like Thorton can even teach a savvy vet like Zach Randolph a few new tricks.

Kevin McHale turned Kevin Love into an all star in MIN.

Not every young big man needs that kind of dedicated coaching to develop. Some have a more natural feel for the game. Some have received that coaching at a lower level. Some staffs do a good job of developing young big men without a dedicated big man coach. Ours, unfortunately, does not.

BNM

I'm not against hiring a big man coach at all. I think that a good one could really benefit Nurk and Collins. Who knows, the right guy might even be able to build Meyers into a serviceable role player. I don't see any downside to hiring a big man coach, but the trick is finding the right guy. Stotts has said that he sees benefit, but the guy has to be able to coach, not just have had a career as a big man. It's a shame that Kim Hughes wasn't smart enough to keep his moth shut about LMA. He really seemed to click with Meyers.

 

[Reep]

I'm not against hiring a big man coach at all. I think that a good one could really benefit Nurk and Collins. Who knows, the right guy might even be able to build Meyers into a serviceable role player. I don't see any downside to hiring a big man coach, but the trick is finding the right guy. Stotts has said that he sees benefit, but the guy has to be able to coach, not just have had a career as a big man. It's a shame that Kim Hughes wasn't smart enough to keep his moth shut about LMA. He really seemed to click with Meyers.

Would have rather seen Olshey go into damage control, talk to Hughes and say it was all a misunderstanding, and keep him on the team. Firing him just made it look worse.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Would have rather seen Olshey go into damage control, talk to Hughes and say it was all a misunderstanding, and keep him on the team. Firing him just made it look worse.

I think firing Hughes was an overreaction on Olshey's part that ultimately was not in the best interest of the team. I think he was pissed that Hughes spilled the beans on losing Aldridge before Olshey could do his usual damage control and put his spin on the situation. I think he viewed that as an act of insubordination by Hughes.

But, in the end, they never hired a replacement and our young big men have failed to develop. So, other than showing everyone who's boss, what did Olshey really accomplish?

I think it could have been handled internally, with some sort of slap on the wrist. Firing Hughes seemed like a case of biting off your nose to spite your face.

BNM

 

[tlongII]

I think firing Hughes was an overreaction on Olshey's part that ultimately was not in the best interest of the team. I think he was pissed that Hughes spilled the beans on losing Aldridge before Olshey could do his usual damage control and put his spin on the situation. I think he viewed that as an act of insubordination by Hughes.

But, in the end, they never hired a replacement and our young big men have failed to develop. So, other than showing everyone who's boss, what did Olshey really accomplish?

I think it could have been handled internally, with some sort of slap on the wrist. Firing Hughes seemed like a case of biting off your nose to spite your face.

BNM

If I could like this post more than once I would.

 

[blue9]

I wonder if Sheed would be interested in coaching? I think players would listen to him.

Speaking of Sheed - last weekend I randomly happened across Dead Prez playing a show on the streets in my neighborhood, and they were reminiscing about Sheed and how he'd heckle them while they were performing. I miss Sheed...

 

[Harry's Raincoat]

I think it goes well beyond our level of play vs Pelicans. We didn't play well over the last 10 games of the RS either. Terrible games and terrible play. It carried over. We had guys dinged up and didn't bring level of play and cohesiveness of play that was needed in 2nd season!!

 

[blue9]

I think it goes well beyond our level of play vs Pelicans. We didn't play well over the last 10 games of the RS either. Terrible games and terrible play. It carried over. We had guys dinged up and didn't bring level of play and cohesiveness of play that was needed in 2nd season!!

And we didn't play very well before the AS break either. Really, the good part of the season was an aberration. We had a period of good play that did a good job of hiding the fact that the team had/had major issues (except to people who look past the Ws and Ls).

 

[Boob-No-More]

And we didn't play very well before the AS break either. Really, the good part of the season was an aberration. We had a period of good play that did a good job of hiding the fact that the team had/had major issues (except to people who look past the Ws and Ls).

It wasn't THAT bad. We won 10 of 15 in the month prior to the All Star break. So, the "good" part of the season (22-5 record) lasted a little over two months. Basically, the team played like a 66 win team for 1/3 of the season.

But, I agree, it was an up and down season that finished on a huge downward trend. The good news is we saw, for 1/3 of a season, what this team is capable of when clicking on all cylinders. The bad news is, we only played at that level once Moe Harkless decided to show up and play like he's capable of playing.

And that's what bothers me the most heading into the 2018-19 season - our fate seems WAY too dependent on which version of Moe Harkless shows up. When the guy is locked in, focused and motivated, POR is a VERY good team. The problem is, when has he ever been that locked in and motivated for more than 1/3 of a season?

I'm also hoping for continued development from Nurk and Zach Collins, but with no proven big man coach working with either, I'm concerned about that as well. Nurk was solid all season defensively and played much better offensively the last four months of the season than the first two. So, I hope he's figured it out and we'll see a full season of "good" Nurk. Collins looks great defensively, but is still a disaster offensively. Without the help of a good big man coach, it seems like it will be a trial by fire, sink or swim approach to Collins' development on the offensive end.

We will have a better bench and more shooting/scoring on the second unit, but I'm not sure that's even enough to tread water in the West. Barring a major trade, the fate of this team is WAY too dependent on a mercurial player who has never been able to put it all together for an entire season. I hope he proves me wrong, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

BNM

 

[blue9]

It wasn't THAT bad. We won 10 of 15 in the month prior to the All Star break. So, the "good" part of the season (22-5 record) lasted a little over two months. Basically, the team played like a 66 win team for 1/3 of the season.

But, I agree, it was an up and down season that finished on a huge downward trend. The good news is we saw, for 1/3 of a season, what this team is capable of when clicking on all cylinders. The bad news is, we only played at that level once Moe Harkless decided to show up and play like he's capable of playing.

And that's what bothers me the most heading into the 2018-19 season - our fate seems WAY too dependent on which version of Moe Harkless shows up. When the guy is locked in, focused and motivated, POR is a VERY good team. The problem is, when has he ever been that locked in and motivated for more than 1/3 of a season?

I'm also hoping for continued development from Nurk and Zach Collins, but with no proven big man coach working with either, I'm concerned about that as well. Nurk was solid all season defensively and played much better offensively the last four months of the season than the first two. So, I hope he's figured it out and we'll see a full season of "good" Nurk. Collins looks great defensively, but is still a disaster offensively. Without the help of a good big man coach, it seems like it will be a trial by fire, sink or swim approach to Collins' development on the offensive end.

We will have a better bench and more shooting/scoring on the second unit, but I'm not sure that's even enough to tread water in the West. Barring a major trade, the fate of this team is WAY too dependent on a mercurial player who has never been able to put it all together for an entire season. I hope he proves me wrong, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

BNM

It's quite unfortunate that all hope of improving lies in the players improving individually. Unfortunately I agree that this is the only way to improve, as I have no hope that Stotts will have much impact.

 

[Boob-No-More]

It's quite unfortunate that all hope of improving lies in the players improving individually. Unfortunately I agree that this is the only way to improve, as I have no hope that Stotts will have much impact.

A year ago, no one on this forum thought there was any way in hell the Blazers would have a top 8 defense, but they did. Kudos to the players for putting in the effort on the defensive end, but Stotts should also get credit for turning things around.

POR has also had a top 10 offense under Stotts in the past. I really hope, after the way the team performed in the playoffs, as well as finishing dead last in team assists, he is spending the entire off season revamping the offense. Stotts isn't Gregg Popovich, but he is a better than average coach (IMHO). Like many coaches, he seemed to fall into a rut. Things that used to work don't any more (all those other smart coaches figure out how to stop you). I think last off season he focused on improving the defense, because it was so glaringly bad, but this resulted in neglecting the offense (kind of resting on his laurels on the offensive end).

Yes, our biggest chance at improving is individual improvement (too bad we don't have a proven, dedicated big man coach to help our young bigs reach their potential...), but I also think Stotts will make some adjustments on the offensive end that will result in more player and ball movement. The roster moves weren't flashy, but Stotts has been given the shooters off the bench he lacked last year. Hopefully, he will figure out how to use them to spread the floor and make things easier for everyone (more Nurk in the high post hitting cutters would be a start).

However, if the Blazers finish last in assists again, I'll be firmly on the Fire Stotts bandwagon. Given our personnel, expecting a team that is top 10 on both ends of the floor may not be realistic, but top 10 on one end and top 20 on the other end should not be too much to ask. Hell, if we can be top 10 on one end and in the top half on the other end we may actually be able to defend our NW Division "title".

Or not, we'll see.

BNM