Sell. If he is healthy start him. Play him 30 to 35 minutes a game. Let him develop just like we should be doing with Sergio, Rudy, Batum, and to a lesser degree, Bayless (only because I feel Sergio is more of an actual point guard). Greg is going to have to man up, play with pain. Obviously make sure that it isn't going to have a long term effect.
Buy. The guy isn't in shape yet nor is he completely 100% healthy. It's a wise move to bring him along slowly. Not starting will take some pressure off of him as well, something that he has too much of these days.
!!!! repped!!!!! Buy. I think he needs to prove he can play 25 minutes a game off the bench for a while. Make him hungry.
Sell. Dumb idea to be honest. He is our best option at center, and needs to be on the floor to get better.
Nate's been known to say that sometimes our best option/player doesn't necessarily equate to being a starter.
Discounting his first two woeful years in PDX, I'd venture to guess his over all winning % is better than most, though.
If he had played his best players in the starting lineup, maybe he wouldn't have had quite such woeful seasons, is what I'm thinking. In any case, he was below .500 in two of the four full seasons he coached Seattle. His best years were his first (partial) and final ones with the Sonics. IF (and that's a big "if") you discount his worst two years, he'd be over .500 for his career, but I think that could be said of the vast majority of NBA head coaches. Ed O.
I'd gamble he didn't even know who his best players were at that time. Oh, WAIT, the best ones were the knuckleheads!
Buy. He needs to learn and to stay healthy. Let him come off the bench this year. He'll still get his minutes.
This has been Nate's plan though, and he's said it consistently in several interviews since last season on Courtside or Wheels show. The offense will continue to be run through LaMarcus and Brandon, and Greg will slowly be worked into the fold. That's what he preaches, but it wasn't executed that way against LA. From the get-go, butterflies and the Laker D unnerved Roy and Aldridge, and they and the rest of the team looked for Oden to bail them out just mere minutes into the game. They said as much in the post game interviews and it showed. Was that game an aberration? I dunno, this isn't exactly a team that changes their habits and behaviors easily--especially when it comes to aggression and toughness. How many times have we seen guys correct their bad tendencies for a game or two, only to revert back to old patterns? I see that likely happening with Oden back in the lineup--the team will look to him to carry them in tight situations instead of working together. Not exactly the pressure-free situation we're trying to create for him. I'm not sure what the answer is honestly? I do think bringing him off the bench for the interim will result in more immediate wins, but it might prolong the cohesion time of our primary core. On the flip side, the gelling of our core is probably more important than wins this year, but losing could also slow that cohesion. A slippery slope for sure.
.531 without the first two years in Portland. .479 with them I'd venture to guess his overall winning % is not better than most coaches that have coached that many years. Especially ones considered one of the best young coaches in the league
I'm sorry, but how in the fuck do you learn to stay healthy? This is the kind of thinking that is ruining America on this day
