Either that, or a complete meltdown. If this team only won 20 games next season, I think Nate would get the axe.
LOL I will happily take any bet you want that it's "It's only a matter of time before Nate gets replaced"
ok, if Nate is replaced in the next 2 years you get my Rep, how long would Nate have to stay around to get your rep
There was no time table given in the original post though. It was simply "It's only a matter of time before Nate gets replaced" That is my bet.
McMillan is really insistent on this. It reminds me of a baby with it's baby blanket. You take it away, and all hell breaks loose. There is a really bond between a baby and it's blanket. There is a real bond between McMillan and his current starters. The dude is passionate about his starting lineup. Don't cross him on it.
MacMillan is so passionate about his starting line-up that he changed it after three games last season (Batum for Outlaw). Don't cross him on it!
Tell me, why would he want to hold on to this so titely Papa G? It's to the point, when you ask him about it. He gets super aggressive and defensive about it. Why?
Interesting discussion... Some observations: -Historically, Blake is terrible as a bench player. -Blake is very good at spreading defense with perimeter shooting and very good down-the-court passing -Blake can play the run-n-gun style - he did it in Denver successfully with AI and Carmello, and got to the playoffs -Ginobly played well off of the bench for the Spurs - so, Miller can still be effective off of the bench too -If Webster does not heal, then Blake must start - who else would keep the defense honest with great outside shooting? -Miller will want to get his shots in - which could take away from Roy (not good), as they both take the same types of shots -A couple of years ago, Nate declared Jack the starter, only to relinquish that role to Blake after just 3 games - the same could happen for Miller; depends on how well the team plays -Priz >>> Oden, until Oden shows me something. Overall, I agree that training camp will determine the starters - despite what Nate has stated.
Nate is an idiot for not exploiting all of Millers talents to the fullest. He can do that by starting him. Even more, he is being dishonest to his offense by not having out there right from the start. He is a point guard. The best we have had since Rod. Terrible Nate. Just Terrible.
Two things First, Miller is far and away a better passer than Blake. It's not even close. This team needs a passer in the worst way. Just ask Oden. Second, this team really needs another player who can attack the rim. At times last year it seemed like all our players wanted to do was jack up shots. Miller is a guy who can get into the paint and either score or make a solid pass. Blake isn't that guy. Everyone lauds Blakes shooting, but that's about all he has going for him. I've felt that this team needs a distributor for a while now. Someone who will get the offense moving. We had some really stagnant stretches last year.
He has a starting line-up going into camp. What's the big deal about him admitting it? That doesn't mean he can't/won't change it depending on how things work out in camp, preseason, and regular season. Perhaps you think the best idea is the "open competition" approach the many colleges use? I see nothing wrong with having a depth chart, and I have no problem if Nate changes the depth chart after a few practices or games, which he has proven he will do. People seem to be reading way too much into what sounds like an off-the-cuff response.
Actually, I do. What's wrong with letting your players know, that hey you will have to earn your position. That there won't be any handouts? Why not mentally prepare them to come into camp ready to really play and fight? In the end, I think it will translate into a overall improved finished product.
Well, you have a philosophical difference with Nate and many other successful coaches. Are the Lakers having an open competition for starting spots? Are the Magic? I don't see how criticizing the guy for taking an approach that many other coaches use makes your view any more valid than their view. Plus, as I said, Nate has shown he will change a starting line-up, and do so rather quickly if things aren't working.
Philsophical difference? Nate has embraced this ideology, ever year except this one? He has informed his players before that they better be prepared to go into camp and work. So it's not really a philosophical difference Papa.
It seems to be a philosophical difference, and if Nate trusts the starting team that won 54 games, I won't pretend to know enough about his views to criticize him for it.
Boy we just bought an expensive backup. Why say anything now? A few years ago he was always for the open competition... but last year he announced starters and I guess he decided to do it again. Just seems strange to me when he hasn't seen the players on the court together yet. Oh well.
