Nate possible choice for the Bobcats

Very doubtful

 

...thinking back on it now, the one's who wanted to get rid of KP were onto something.

 

Mike Budenholzer can be had at the end of the season.

 

If you don't count Roy (which you shouldn't this year), we are the only current Western Conference playoff team without an all star. That's not easy for any coach.

 

That's who I want them to hire. Too bad he doesn't have ties to the city of Seattle somehow

 

Winning ugly is tolerable. Losing ugly is box office poison.

Nate was Roy's coach, not the team's coach. If he can't adapt to the players he actually has available, then he needs to go.

 

You hate that question because you have no depth to your "I hate Nate, Nate sucks" position. Firing someone when you have no idea who is available that would represent an upgrade makes no sense. If the Blazers fired McMillan and got someone of the caliber of PJ Carlisimo, the team would be much, much, much worse off.

 

Why? He's about 92 years old.

 

I agree with this- in general. Granted, Nate has been saddled with a lot of injured players, but he refused to alter what he wanted in a game plan to suit his players best abilities. That is something good coaches do. Rather than taking open court players and letting them run hard, he tried to make them plodding type players. Add to that his rotations have been probably more detrimental to developing young talent than not.

He has his good coaching qualities, but I think we need a smarter coach in here. As to who, I really don't know. There are always a few really good assistant coaches around.

 

Not necessarily. I mean Mo Cheeks is a shitty coach, but he has a better winning % as a Blazers coach than Nate does.

I hate the question because it's unanswerable. When Dr Jack left, we promoted Adelman, and I remember people talking about why we didn't bring in someone more proven. Adelman turned out to be a great choice. You simply can't answer "who would be better". Laimbeer, Auriemma, Budenholzer, Adelman all could be better, and all could be worse. Larry Brown is a future HOF coach that just got shit canned. PJ was an outstanding college coach that seemd like a good hire, but wasn't. You just never know how a team will react to a coach. Nate gets a lot out of this team, but his offense will always be an anchor for them in the playoffs. Another coach might get us blown out when we are this unhealthy, but win us a title, or getus deep in the playoffs if sorta healthy.

 

After Ramsey we brought in Mike Schuler.

 

What a terrible point of comparison. Not that I did anyhow, but all the more reason to not take your Nate Hate seriously.

 

Yes, my bad

 

With the same players? In any case, I have no idea how this was a response to what I said. Had I said, "McMillan is an awesome coach, he wins games," it would make some sense. What I said was that advocating to fire someone when it's unclear who you'd like to replace them is not a very robust position. All it boils down to is "I don't like McMillan," which is fine but a pretty one-dimensional position. I don't like Marks as a player, but that's not a very useful observation if I have no solutions to replace him.

That is not to say McMillan should be retained...if Cho and the front office have someone they believe would be better, by all means replace him. If they're a good front office, they'll be right. If they're a bad front office, the team is screwed anyway.

 

I think I was saying we needed to get Tom Thibodeau last year when this question popped up. Luckily, that didn't happen. Has Chicago even won a game?

I seriously think most of the fans here are worried about what name sounds better as opposed to actually finding a good coach and maybe just maybe letting him make a name for himself.

 

Yes he was, yet a very large percentage of Blazer fans wanted to see a change when they fired him. They said he couldn't when the big one. That he just rolled the ball out and let them play. That he could only coach veteran players. etc etc etc.
Would we have been better off to keep him? Hell yes. But neither Paul nor many Blazer fans knew what the fuck they were talking about..............

 

Rick at least got his team to 2 finals appearances and 3 WCFs in his 5 year tenure. What does Nate have to hang his hat on? Sub .500 record (not all his fault) and two first round exits? At some point it's just time for a change ... this might be one of those times.

 

Just saying that's exactly what we said when we got rid of Rick. "Time for a change"

 

OK, but my feeling is that this is more like when Shuler needed the boot, not Rick.

 

A few of the players may not be enamored with the Nate's offense, but I think for the most part they like and respect him. Not the case with Schuler. The players were ready to rebel against Mike.