Hornets @ Blazers 1/25/2010 Game Thread

Tince will defend McMillan until he's blue in the face, so there's really no point in arguing with him.

 

[video=youtube;ySIkXF19fbo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySIkXF19fbo[/video]

 

Only against the people who bash him until they are blue in the face

I'll defend a good percentage of NBA coaches, not just Nate. I have a hard time believing that we have 10+ people who post here who know more about coaching basketball than Nate. Every forum has their know-it-all posters who know more than Coach K, Tommy Lasorda, and Bill Walsh combined...

 

and you'll do the opposite.

 

We don't even run the pick and roll. That's a two man play where you have two scoring options. We either run straight ISO or high pick for the player with the ball with no rolling to the basket.

Do those same teams keep running it over and over and over when it isn't working? I'm guessing not. At least I've never seen any other coach stubbornly run the same failed play repeatedly when it isn't working. It makes sense to run a play repeatedly when it's working. Running it repeatedly when it's not working is the definition of insanity.

BNM

 

I have never in my entire life said I'd be a better coach than Nate McMillan, or any other NBA coach.

However, I do believe Nate gets out coached on a regular basis by other coaches when it comes to in game play calling and that there are better coaches in this league than him. I want one of those coaches. We have the richest owner in sports. We should also have the best coach. We do not. I want better.

BNM

 

We run the Pick and Roll all the time when Roy is healthy. We run it with Bayless and Miller as well, I'd be willing to bet we ran it 10+ times tonight.

And to answer your second question: Yes, I see it all the time. I logged a Heat game about two weeks ago where they kept running a high pick and roll with Wade and Haslem and I bet it only worked 1 out of 7 times, but they kept going back to it. This happens a lot more than people think...

Just like if Roy has missed his last 4 shots, but there is 15 seconds left on the clock and we are down 1, the majority of coaches in the league would go back to Roy.

 

If you could name 15 coaches in the NBA that out coach Nate I would be shocked and I now for a fact I would have a major argument with at least half of them. Like I said earlier in the thread, I think Nate ranks somewhere between 5-7 in the league when it comes to NBA coaches. I don't think the Phil Jackson and Jerry Salons of the world are going to be coming to Portland anytime soon.

I remember everyone bashing Dunleavy 10 years ago saying some of the same things about his predictability and how we need to make a change, and we got Mo Cheeks.

 

Tonight, a pick and roll? How many times did the ball get passed to the player rolling to the basket? It sure as hell didn't happen once in the last 3:26 when the game was pissed away by Nate's predicable, ineffective play calling.

BNM

 

I didn't know Nate passed the ball on the Pick and Roll, I think that falls on the PG. And yes it happened, I recall Pendergraph getting a dunk on one of the very first possession in fact.

You did notice NOH packing the paint on defense didn't you? They were mainly facing the ball and daring us to shoot. Unless you know of a powerful and explosive 7'0" center we have sitting on our bench, I'm not sure who would be qualified to roll to the hoop and clog up the lane.

You won't see guys like Howard or LMA roll down the key a lot because they typically don't finish well in traffic. Now guys like Joel roll almost 100% of the time because they can't shoot. It makes sense to me that these guys roll or slip according to their skill set.

 

I'm off to bed. Too bad we didn't get the win tonight, hopefully we can take Utah down on Wednesday!

Rip City fellas

 

Why not? Stop thinking small. Phil's contract is up at the end of the season. So, coincidentally is Nate's. How convenient. Phil is PISSED at Jerry Buss because his main squeeze, Jeanie Buss, who deserved the job, was passed over to run the team in favor of her much less qualified brother, Jim.

Paul Allen is the richest owner in sports. He wants to win a championship badly. There is no salary cap for coaches. The second Phil's contract with the Lakers expires, Paul Allen should be with him on the phone with him personally offering whatever it would take to get Phil in Portland. Paul just signed LaMarcus Aldridge to a $65 million contract (that will cost Paul Allen significantly more when we are over the luxury tax threshold). Why not offer Phil that much over 3 years? That's a big raise over the $12 million the Lakers are paying him. If that's not enough, try $75 million over three years. There is no salary cap or luxury tax on coaches salaries. Paul has no kids. He can't take his billions with him when he goes. Why not spend it on someone who will increase the odds of getting what he really wants - an NBA championship?

BNM

 

1) I'd be shocked if he'd leave

2) You don't put the triangle offense in over night

3) I'd rather the $75M go to resigning our players and going into the luxury tax.

 

The entire content of my post game comments were based on the critical last 3:26 of the game - that's where Nate's predictable, repetitive play calling cost us another game we should have won (just like the Memphis game on the 5th).

It's great that Pendergraph got a dunk off the pick and roll for our first basket of the game. That's what happens when Nate gives the players a little freedom and let's Andre call some plays. It's when Nate takes over the play calling late in the game that everything becomes predictable and grinds to a halt.

BNM

 

So, you don't put any system in overnight. If you're going to put in a new system, why not go with a coach and a system that has proven results (ten titles). How many NBA championships has Nate McMillan's system won? How many years do we stick with it before we try something new?

Why not both? It's not an either-or situation. Paul has plenty of money to resign his players AND pay Phil. The money spent on Phil would be money well spent. It doesn't count against the salary cap or the luxury tax. If you're going to be investing heavily in your players, doesn't it make sense to pay what it takes to get a coach who can guide them to a championship?

BNM

 

Where was the argument in my post? I was simply saying that Tince believes that McMillan is a good coach, and there are those of us on this forum who feel otherwise. Tince can show evidence, as can we. It isn't changing anyone's minds.

The fact that McMillan waited as long as he did to take Steve Blake out of the starting lineup and put Andre Miller in his place, is all the evidence I will ever need. Refute that Rocketeer.

 

change "tince" to "natebishop" and you have exactly what i'm saying. you're willing to argue that nate is a terrible coach regardless of what happens.

 

If we are talking pure X's and O's, I could name 28. I think Nate is better than Mike Brown.

 

the only problem with the grizz.... no depth at all. one of those starters go down and they are all but screwed.

 

I looked through a bunch of posts here but haven't seen one that mentions the obvious fact that the Hornets shoot WAY more free throws then Portland.

Another interesting stat: Bayless only played 13 minutes.



Why in the name of all that is unholy was Blake in the game for the last 7 minutes instead of Bayless? Why did Blake play 22 minutes in a game when Portland needed someone to be aggressive and make Paul play defense?



Nate may very well be doing a good job in a whole bunch of other areas but his handling of Blake versus Bayless is a fucking sad joke. Actually, Nate's over use of Blake is my number one biggest complaint.

There have been games where Blake has it going and is effective. Last night wasn't one of them and it was obvious after the first 8 minutes of the game.