Which of the 23 coaches beneath Nate would anyone rather have? I say this because the ones above Nate won't come here.
I am not one of them. The national media that doesn't spend a lot od time around the Blazers love Nate. It's the local media that sees how poor of an offense we have without Brandon bailing us out that know better.
Are you going to post the same complaints about him at every opportunity, or make sure any post that could in any way involve a slam on Nate does involve one?
nope, thats why I said I am less vocal about it. Although my wife has to hear a lot about it. I just think this team has outgrown Nate. He is a coach who instills discipline and organization. This is no longer a team that needs that. They are a team that needs to be freed, and let to run loose on everyone.
Funny how the national media seems to do a pretty good job with teh rest of the top 10. I guess it is they are just clueless when it comes to the Blazers (and their lack of exposure to Nate who is an NBA coach and a Team USA coach)
Some time? I've known about your strong feeling about Nate since early last year. Didn't you think he took a personal dig on you or something like that?
Maybe my time is blurring together, but I thought I started developing a dislike for how he does things once Channing was gone, and then Outlaw, and I started realizing things werent changing with them gone. Not sure what you mean about a personal dig though sorry.
When the article says that Nate "designs brilliant half-court offenses" as his main strength, I have a hard time buying in. It is clear to me his greatest strength is motivating his players (see: 50 wins last year).
I don't have a problem with the pure number, but Prado's assertion that his biggest strength is: should work in the playoffs, if they're brilliant. Or should be able to be tweaked. He's a motivating guy, though. I don't see a huge difference between Nate and Spoelstra, except that Spoelstra's defensive mindset translates into high marks for defensive efficiency while Nate's has us in the middle-of-the-pack. And while both have 2-guard-dominated offenses, Spoelstra's "lack of creative offense" is a weakness while Nate's ability to have Greg, Joel and Camby rebound the jumpers we miss means he "designs brilliant half-court offenses".
Yea, I saw that and questioned how many Blazer games the author actually sat through. Nate get's a lot of the credit for the wins that Roy and LaMarcus brought to the team through raw talent. When coaching really counts in the Playoffs, Alvin Gentry made him look awful.
That is ridiculous...he has had 20+ years to win a championship and has never done so...Jordan wasnt in the finals for 20 years ...Id just like to add that Phil Jackson has never been the Coach of the Year....seriously
