tom thibodeau would be my first choice. after that i'd be happy with kp, mark jackson, avery johnson or van gundy but i honestly dont see nate getting fired until after next year at the earliest
Weren't you berating posters earlier for not "knowing the game"? This has to be one of the dumbest posts I've seen in a long time.
how is it nate's fault turkoglu and davis made big shots.....?? and how is it his fault that blake missed FTs?
You think KP's plot is for him to be the coach? Not only do you advocate killing all Christians on the OT board, but you also know zero about the NBA. Ed O, what is your take?
Hedo banks in a 3 Blake goes 1/5 If that doesn't happen, we're 17-8 and nobody's even talking about Nate's job.
What is our record...15-10 (honestly, I don't pay attention). That's still pretty good. About a 50 win season if we keep that up. Not too shabby from 41-41 last year.
Every post you make has a negative impact on these forums. Me thinking KP is going to be the Blazers coach is the dumbest thing you've heard in a long time? Do you ever read what you write? I'd still like to know what's so far fetched about KP coaching the Blazers.
Unlike the all-star game, I'm so glad fans don't get to vote on when coaches get fired and who replaces them. Nate isn't perfect, but some of the alternatives people have thrown out here are just priceless. Mark Jackson?! Wow.
Well, Nate's contract has got him here until next season and I think he'll last barring some tremendous unexpected breakdown. The question might be whether he wants to still be here after turning down an extension this summer, and if he feels he's the right guy to lead us to a title. I'd like to see Nate stay and don't see a reason to fire him. Sure, we point out flaws every game, but share the blame on the entire coaching staff as well. They all have a hand in this -- not just Nate.
Naw, that one was pretty serious. I've thought for a couple of years that he probably would have a pretty good shot to break the "college coaches can't go to the NBA" ceiling--if he gets a primo lead assistant job for a couple of years first. He's got a good fundamental pedigree -- both his father and Pete Carill have been huge influences on his coaching style. He's run the Princeton offense for years, but throws in little variants to make it his own. He's defensive-minded, smart, successful...but he just signed a 6-year extension. He's probably not going anywhere.
How about Brad Smith, the former coach at Oregon City? I don't think Nate is in any danger this year unless the team flames out in a fairly spectacular way. Not getting wins isn't enough to get him fired this year. barfo
Each season, I become more and more reassured with Nate, so I'm a little surprised this thread is popping up so early in the season. Then again, maybe I'm not too surprised. When is the last time anyone complained about the team's effort? I can't recall because it's been so long. So, the team isn't tuning him out and continues to play hard for him. Does the team improve year-to-year? The winning% keeps improving. We get good teams best efforts and are respected league-wide. Do individual players continue to improve? I see improvements(sometimes marginal) in nearly every player. Is Nate stubborn, inflexible, and unwilling to implement new systems/approaches? The team is running more this year. He has stated numerous times in interviews/quotes that he wants to push fastbreak opportunities when possible. He recognizes the value in easy baskets. Will he introduce anything beside a pick n' float offense? I guess he attempted to install motion, but the guys couldnt catch on. I think I heard this Friday from Jason Quick on the Fan...or maybe I read it in one of his articles? Sorry, hopefully others heard that too. I think the only thing he can truly be criticized of is not experimenting enough. There are A LOT of combinations we still havent seen this year. At least in games. And the younger guys are given shorter leashes because of how deterimental mistakes are to winning. He values winning over everything, even at the expense of individual player development. Is it worth firing him over?
I posted this on another thread. The Spurs have one more year to get a ring and then they are to old. We have the players and the general manager to get us Pop and Parker. Both of our problems are solved. PG that can get to the hoop and a coach the can bring a good bunch of kids together to win multiple championships.
