Canzano Reports (Hey stop laughing!) Nate being offered extension

Because he bites at adjustment; once the (very hard, omg, just kill me now please, I'm canceling my season tickets) adjustment period is over, then the team plays well again. I liken it to a bison or a battleship: very solid, and hard to stop, but also not exactly the most maneuverable. Hard to turn, but very good at moving forward.

 

Magic. Kareem. Worthy. Wilkes. Cooper. Nixon. Any of us could have coached the L*kers and won titles.

 

Plus, Magic Johnson was the reason Westhead was fired. Contrary to popular belief, Westhead was not a fastbreak coach prior to the Lakers firing him. Something snapped creatively after that, and the 1989-90 LMU teams were the other extreme. Also remember that Jerry West coached the Laker offense during Riley's first season.

 

The point is that Riley was unproven, and had anyone in here been asked if replacing an extremely successful head coach with an unproven assistant coach, and they would have said it was stupid. Yet it turned out just fine. Pretty much every single successful head coach in the NBA was an unproven assistant first.

 

Some people say that Roy isn't as good as he once was, and we should be looking in the draft for a guard.

I say we should never draft again, because, can you please give a list of the new Roys available so we can go over it together?

Some people say that Grant Hill, Shaquille O'Neal, and Jason Kidd should retire, and their teams should look for someone in the draft.

But I say they should never draft again, because, can you please give a list of the new Grant Hill, Shaquille O'Neal, and Jason Kidd out there so we can go over it together?

Some people say there will be a 2015 Chevy, but do you see one out there? Then it will never happen.

There should never be a replacement for anything if there is any chance involved. Never attempt a trial and error process. Only go where you are certain.

Your list must have only people without risk. Some people say we should get rid of our coach Maurice Cheeks, but please give a list...

 

Not because I simply don't want him back, but nate woul dbe stupid to sign a contract with Portland before the summer. He will definately have suitors

 

Pretty much every sucessful head coach in the NBA was a zygote first.

 

Your point is pretty bad, in your(all examples) example Roy isn't as good while Nate hasn't drop off any, if he suddenly had us in the lotto consistently then ya look for a new coach.

 

I don't think it matters what Nate does for the rest of the year, he will be the hottest commodity as a coach this summer. Unless PA throws an obscene amount of money at him, he will play out the "free agency" this summer.

 

Riley was taking over a team that had won a title and had two MVP-level players (Magic/Kareem) and solid role players. Plus, as I posted previously, Jerry West helped coach the team during Riley's first season. Also, Riley was already in the Laker organization as an assistant coach, and Jerry Buss was very familiar with him.

I see absolutely no parallel between Riley being hired by the Lakers and some young unproven coach replacing Nate. The situations surrounding the teams are not at all similar.

 

The Blazers can't afford to lose McMillan.

 

Not picking sides or anything, but which injuries were wear and tear?

E-will's? Joel's? Oden's microfractures or exploding knee cap? Where has Oden gotten any 'wear'?

Roy had bad knees in college and little cartilage/meniscus. You could argue that Nate overplayed him due to this limitation, but how do you keep your best player on the bench when he was feeling fine?

I'm not following this argument at all.

 

I would classify anything that isn't a dramatic impact injury (like a collision or someone rolling up on your ankle) as wear and tear, fatigue-related. Some coaches always have "bad luck" with similar injuries and never change how they do things... Coaches rarely change their ways on these matters. They either get it or they don't. It's all about identifying the common denominator and eliminating unnecessary risks in the training. This may or may not apply to McMillan - none of us have the necessary view of the team's inner workings to know for sure - but the pattern fits in many ways.

This team is going nowhere (of significance) as long as the injury woes continue, so if there's even a small chance that my hunch is right, it seems worth trying a different direction.

 

NO shit HCP. I can't think of any.

 

What were Nate's injury issues when he coached the Sonics? Also, Pat Riley is reknowned for his punishing practices that go far beyond other coaches, yet has he had a problem with "fatigue-related" injuries. You really want to change coaches because of your "hunch" that seemingly has no basis in any consistent application, when compared to other coaches in the NBA?

 

Best young assistant in the NBA - Monty Williams.

Oops.

 

Monty has an MVP runner-up in Chris Paul and a recent All-Star in David West, and is still struggling to keep in playoff position. I'll take Nate over Monty at this point.

 

He aksed for a list.

I have been pretty happy with Nate this season.

Even still, I haven't changed on my opinion from this summer, that it is time for Nate to move on. He needs to move forward in his career and have the challenge of coaching a contending team. We aren't that.

He is a hot commodity in the coaching free agent market. I had little interest in begging him to sign the largest head coaching contract in the NBA. I had little interest in having him as a lame duck coach. I either wanted someone else to come in, or to give a young buck a trial run. We aren't doing anything this year anyway. Start now.

As well as Nate has done, I think Monty - as a rookie head coach - has done incredibly well. If we lose Nate, and Monty is a good coach for years to come, this team, once again, will have shown a propensity for poor long range planning.

 

what goes for pretty much every unsuccessful head coach?

STOMP